Jump to content

Several incentives approved to attract long-staying foreign investors, wealthy foreigners


Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

What is it like being married to the 1% who still support this guy? I cannot find a single soul who does anymore. Some die hards did, until he blew the vax effort and the response to the latest waves. She needs to get out more. My heart goes out to you.

They are still out there in bigger numbers than you think; or indeed, bigger numbers tha any of us like to think !  My Wife is a former Midwife and you would be taken aback by how many of her old Colleagues and Friends are Prayut lovers. We meet several of them often and my question to them is always ''What has this waste of space done about moving this country forwards instead of backwards and where is the 'Happiness' he promised to return to the people ? ''   After Um's and Ar's i'm always told that all the problems are from the former Administration !   Many also seem to think the 'Progress' has been made during his Tenure; the mind boggles.

  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
20 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Thailand’s cabinet approved, in principle, a measure to attract “high potential” foreigners, including wealthy retirees and specialists, to stay long term in the country in a bid to promote foreign investment and to improve the struggling economy.

 

20 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Thailand has set a target to attract as many as one million of these classes of foreigners

Didn't Toxin try the same thing with the Thailand Elite scheme?

 

And how did that work out?

 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Thanakorn and cronies better take a walk outside and see what their country really looks like to an outsider.  The place is falling apart !!!!!

Posted
13 minutes ago, geisha said:

Thanakorn and cronies better take a walk outside and see what their country really looks like to an outsider.  The place is falling apart !!!!!

Lol, drama much?

 

Thailand looks very attractive and is certainly not "falling apart". Just a few issues like everywhere else.

Posted (edited)

Bringing in more of the super-rich will not benefit the ordinary Thais who have until recently depended upon tourism for their livelihood.  I am thinking of small hotel and guesthouse owners and staff, tour and tourist-activity organisations and guides, taxi- and tuktuk-drivers, etc.

 Top-down thinkers are proposing top-down solutions.  Why not poll the masses adversely affected by their closures?

Wrecking an economy is simple. 

Re-building an economy is more complicated.  Especially when economic decline is global.

Edited by onthedarkside
trolling comment removed
  • Like 1
Posted

The people they say they want to attract would already be in Thailand if that's where they wanted to be. What he is really saying is Thailand wants to help rich criminals launder their money and generally join in the corruption that already goes on. The amount of money available to the dodgy police etc must be well down on what it was.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

yeah that why wealthy chinese rush to canada and australia because they hate being told how to invest their money in gov bonds or RE to get residency so much....

 

What u think wealthy people give af about and what they really do are two entirely different things. 

 

These shemes exist in most countries including the united states of america, the uk, australia and co. - and somehow there's plenty of people using them. 

At least in most Western countries the law is the law and 90% less corruption still in Canada the Chinese try to abuse the laws????

Posted
20 hours ago, Caldera said:

It's fascinating to watch. But really, for almost anyone who will meet their new criteria, there are better places.

Having worked a few years ago in Thailand as an "expert", here is a word of warning  to would-be experts to go to Thailand under any future scheme : do not expect your advices to be heeded, you are likely to be considered as a fly on the wall and to be used for obscure, opaque and internal reasons.

  • Like 2
Posted
5 hours ago, rupert the bear said:

if you reach these criteria or even half way why would u come here?its insane.you can go to many places where red tapes minimal,you can own property and businesses,have certain rights to stay ,be part of the health programme,no reporting,no racist pricing....the list goes on.more self delusional nonsense.from what im seeing and hearing many expats wanna leave as the covids shown quite clearly the future for foreigners and the govt strategy,they wish to be a china clone so they can rule indefinately and perpetuate the corrupt feudal autocracy that is thailand,many thais have had enough they wanna leave or will go at it with this form of govt which means more instability,unless u have a family,wife,business here the rest are considering a move in fairly large nos.

Can you (or anybody) please state some of the countries that fulfill the 7 criteria that you list above. 

A number of people have made similar statements and I am interested to see where Thailand is being compared to. 

Posted
22 hours ago, johng said:

From the Thai PBS page   this old chestnut again !!

 

"Thanakorn said that laws and regulations regarding land ownership will also be amended to attract foreign investors"

And re-amended again once they have sucked out your money.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

They already have a visa, it's called retirement visa...

 

 

 

 

 

There are laws in place already that allows foreigner to own small parts of land, but never get used. 

 

 

 

 

Could just ammend these laws or actually use them... thais like to overcomplicate all sorts of stuff tho...

That's right. The 1999 amendment to the Land Code allows foreigners to buy a rai of land, subject to conditions that are either very difficult or impossible.  The bill was hotly contested in parliament by both government and opposition MPs and diluted till it was almost unusable.  Then the Interior Ministry dragged its heels for 3 years drafting a few lines of ministerial regulations needed to activate the amendment.  By that time the specialist real estate funds that could be bought to qualify as the B40m investment were no longer in issue and the Bank of Thailand never issued the special bonds that qualified, saying they didn't need the money.  So there was a bureaucratic conspiracy to make the amendment redundant. In addition it was never going to be practical to wait for the minister's approval to buy a plot of land.  Sellers usually want cash fast and can't wait for months to see whether the minister approves or not with a strong likelihood he would not or would just never reply.    

  • Thanks 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, geisha said:

You are joking ? It’s a huge shanty town . 

Thailand is a shanty town? Have you ever been to Central Festival?

 

Try finding that in the UK, Germany, France etc...

Posted

Pattaya Mail voice a controversial opinion on the new rules:

 

"Thailand’s new rules for retiree visas sound alarm bells"

 

"The immediate question is whether current retirees will have to move to the new regulations or whether they will be protected on the rules as they are."

 

"It is possible, though by no means certain, that they will be “grandfathered”, that is able to retain one year renewable extensions of stay but without any of the new perks promised for the wealthier group."

 

(By Barry Kenyon, 15/9)

 

Personally, I think that's all hogwash. I'm pretty sure it's an addition not a replacement.

 

What they, maybe, did get right is this:

 

"The proposals will appeal mostly to (i.e. target) Chinese and other Asian investors who already dominate the foreign-bought condo market and the multi-billion (in any currency) import and export complex dominated by the Eastern Economic Corridor."

 

The replacement of "will appeal mostly to" by "target" is my amendment. How much it will "appeal" remains to be seen.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, WinterGael said:

I have 3 brothers, all wealthy (entrepreneurs, property management and real estate, investments, etc.) Who have all been to Thailand at least once.  I wanted to start a business with my wife here, but not one of them would help me.  Why?

 

They all agree on one thing, this is not a country to invest in.  One brother likes it a lot, but he would never live here because, "Everything is cheap... cheaply built, cheaply managed, cheaply run for one reason only, to get people like me to throw my money away here." Pretty much how they all feel, so not willing to lend me money.  If we move to Vietnam, yes; Cambodia or the Philippines, maybe.

 

None of them would ever consider retiring here. One is retiring to the Philippines. 

 

They tell me took.look around and see why some countries are worth doing business in and why some are not. Thailand used to be,but not anymore. So here are some of their issues:

 

1.  No stable, non corrupt, efficiently run government in decades.

2.  Money before quality (money is wanted, but poor quality return for investment.).

3.  Too much reliance on tourism detracts from reliance on industry and service (poor service overall).

4.  Thailand has become expensive from a real world point of view (such as highest wages in ASEAN; Bangkok one of the most expensive cities to live in; government's expectations on foreign investment and earnings too high).

 

I get the last one.  I'm a digital nomad. I know Thailand wants to be a hub for digital nomads, but they also expect a monthly income in excess of 80,000 baht per month.  I'm lucky if I can pull off an average of 30,000 baht a month, so live off my pension. (And I work hard...)

 

Thailand needs to rethink a lot of things, otherwise the only ones investing here will be the Chinese. I see a lot of Japanese companies pulling out.

First off, the reasonings of your brothers are kinda weird. Not investing in Thailand because everything is cheaply build? Well yeah that's why it's cheap. You can get good quality here but you pay for it as you would elsewhere. Also Thailand unstable and corrupt but Philippines would be okay? What? Too much reliance on tourism? You know that tourism before covid was less than 20% of the GDP? It's a lot don't get me wrong but there's a lot more in Thailand than just tourism

 

Theres legitimate reasons to not invest here, like the ownership problem, I just think the reasons you concluded are kinda weird especially the comparisons to other countries that are just as sketchy as Thailand when it comes to business, laws, politics and regulations

 

Also 80'000 THB per month is not unreasonable to ask for a digital nomad and for sure not only Chinese will invest here lol. I know in a perfect world everyone would contribute their part and everyone would be welcome but we don't live in a perfect world and by setting the bar too low you attract a lot of people that wouldn't be a net benefit for this country (and with net benefit I mostly mean you bring enough money, which for a country also is completely reasonable to expect)

Posted
3 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

The only reason they buy RE there is to get a passport. 

Thailand offers none of this, and is entirely irrelevant to those kind of people.

 

 

Money laundering

Posted
1 hour ago, geisha said:

You are joking ? It’s a huge shanty town . 

I do agree that Thailand is falling apart. Rapidly. Most do not have any idea of the true devastation of the economy at this time. It will take years to sort out. 

  • Like 1
Posted

The first thing that the government should do, to attract the better-off, is to lower the excessive tax on wines and champagnes. I know of no other country where it is so high. Most middle classes take wine with their meals, and the cost of the meal with decent wine is more expensive than any Western Country. The food is good value but wine, as an example say ordinary champagne, at £200 a bottle (£100 in the supermarket) deters many potential visitors, choosing other more viable destinations.

The government, however, cannot see further than their noses.

Posted
On 9/14/2021 at 11:15 AM, fangless said:

"To attract these high potential individuals, a new long-term resident visa or smart visa will be issued, under which they will be granted some privileges, such as not being required to notify Thai authorities every 90 days."

 

Does that that mean that the "these high potential  individuals" don't commit crimes so therefore they don't need to report every 90days?

 

The Mafia are always above the law.

Posted

It would actually be awesome if they turned Thailand into a 0% income tax jurisdiction like the Cayman Islands. I mean it's not like anyone is paying tax or the government is providing benefits of any kind anyway. Then you'd get some super rich, if the political stability thing is sorted out.

 

There's actually not enough tax havens in Asia. Why bother with the prentense of collecting tax or the government actually doing anything for the people? You could just as well go no income tax.

Posted
12 hours ago, Khun Yogi said:

These hair brained, pipe dream schemes are an insult to many of us foreigners who have invested 10's of millions into factories businesses etc over 2 to 3 decades only to to see our investment now worthless while "new money" gets all the benefits. You can now see why many foreigners are closing up shop and leaving.

It's a bit like companies in the UK who trample all over their loyal, long term customers, by offering good deals for "new customers only"

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, ericbj said:

Bringing in more of the super-rich will not benefit the ordinary Thais who have until recently depended upon tourism for their livelihood.  I am thinking of small hotel and guesthouse owners and staff, tour and tourist-activity organisations and guides, taxi- and tuktuk-drivers, etc.

 Top-down thinkers are proposing top-down solutions.  Why not poll the masses adversely affected by their closures?

Wrecking an economy is simple. 

Re-building an economy is more complicated.  Especially when economic decline is global.

They have wrecked the economy, and are only interested in such rebuilding as may benefit the small group of wealthy individuals to whom they are beholden.

 

The people you describe, small hotel and guesthouse owners and staff, tour and tourist-activity organisations and guides, taxi- and tuktuk-drivers, etc, are quite simply not considered.

They simply are not part of the equation.

Edited by herfiehandbag
  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...