Caution urged for relaxing laws on foreigners owning land in Thailand

[GarryP]

2 hours ago, Guderian said:

Is this the same nutter who, a few years back, claimed that farangs already own 30% of the land Thailand? When you checked his numbers, it turned out he was also claiming that farangs owned 150% of the land in Phuket! Please, turn him off somebody, lol.

By the looks of him, his battery has already nearly run out. 

[Rampant Rabbit]

It Rhymes with SPANKER

[janetdoe]

So why is it a bad idea? Does he say?

Edited September 20, 2021 by janetdoe

[ThomasThBKK]

58 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

Thailand should never let this happen. Mega agribusinesses like Archer Daniels will buy up all of Thai agri-land, kick the peasants out, and them sell the products abroad while the average Thai will starve.

Companies can already buy and own land using a Board of Investment sheme, this is for private citizens, your comment makes zero sense.

[Rimmer]

Some posts and replies have been removed, please do not stray off the topic again.

 

Caution urged for relaxing laws on foreigners owning land in Thailand

[sawadee1947]

4 hours ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

allow US citizens to buy land

As far as I know there is indeed an agreement with US Citizens, which was signed within or after Vietnam war? Americans are allowed to buy Land.

[BestB]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

Dr Sophon warned that Thailand did not have the preventative measures in place like other countries to prevent the widespread purchase of land in Thailand by foreigners. 

Anyone know what measures he is talking about ?

[Scott Tracy]

I thought most of the land was owned by either: the banks or the government or the temples.I

 

Around here, most land has no chanote, and that which does is in hock to the bank. The land without chanote is worked... Sometimes... The land with, well, no one can afford to pay the debt to the banks and no one can work it while it belongs to the banks...

So, the land without chanote, who really owns it...?

[ThomasThBKK]

2 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

I thought most of the land was owned by either: the banks or the government or the temples.I

 

Around here, most land has no chanote, and that which does is in hock to the bank. The land without chanote is worked... Sometimes... The land with, well, no one can afford to pay the debt to the banks and no one can work it while it belongs to the banks...

So, the land without chanote, who really owns it...?

By default all land is owned by VIP, unless it has a title deed.

 

There are other big land owners like the government who owns all the national parks etc. and yes the temples.

 

 

Foreign landownership in this country that is rather large and has lots of costal areas is an absolute non-issue.

[BKKTRAVELER]

2 hours ago, Surasak said:

Expand their influence! What influence would that be exactly?

Well, by owning lands, buildings and such abroad. Look at what Central owns in Europe and you might reconsider your thought.

[BKKTRAVELER]

16 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

As far as I know there is indeed an agreement with US Citizens, which was signed within or after Vietnam war? Americans are allowed to buy Land.

Wasn't really aware of that. Not doubting your statement, just didn't about it. Now, maybe through a BOI company?

[BKKTRAVELER]

1 hour ago, Tonypandy said:

Are you joking. Let's see how this good spot prevails over the next couple of years. 

In terms of land in their own country and the fact they can buy abroad, yes they are in a good spot. If you ask about the rest of their economic and social affairs, that's another story.

[sawadee1947]

3 minutes ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

Wasn't really aware of that. Not doubting your statement, just didn't about it. Now, maybe through a BOI company?

An American, who owns land in ChiangDao next to ChiangMai told me that. He was serving in Vietnam and was allowed in those days to buy land. So some of his mates. I really don't know if this privilege is still granted.

[GarryP]

2 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

An American, who owns land in ChiangDao next to ChiangMai told me that. He was serving in Vietnam and was allowed in those days to buy land. So some of his mates. I really don't know if this privilege is still granted.

I seem to recall that up until 1972 that was possible.  

[Neni]

6 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

They could restrict it to the building of say one official family holding and dwelling of say 1 Rai maximum

This is an excellent suggestion. I would like to buy a small piece of land and build a house on it for my family, Thai wife and three Thai children. 

[newnative]

      This is why very little gets done.  A policy change is proposed.  A few people loudly object, and the policy change dies.  Helps if you can scare people while you're loudly objecting. 'The Chinese will buy the entire country!!!'  Helps also to get in early with the loud objection, killing it before a proposed policy change such as this one could be tweaked with things like severely limiting the land purchases and perhaps putting a time limit in place to evaluate the new policy and see how it is working.    

[DrJack54]

I love webfact covers all bases.

 

[tonypattaya]

It's not as though a foreigner can take land back home!!! Land bought in Thailand stays in Thailand.

London is owned mostly by foreigners who bring their wealth to the UK, who educate their children in the UK, who grow up and stay, and bring their inheritance to the UK.

This creates jobs and prosperity and exemplifies why Thailand with its stupid thinking will never be on the world stage!

[DavisH]

5 hours ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

I honestly think each country should preserve the ownership of their own land. But that's not the case in many countries nowadays. But then it should bilateral agreements. If a Thai can purchase a land in the US for example, they should allow US citizens to buy land in Thailand. Since Thailand forbids any foreigner to buy their land, they shouldn't be allowed to buy land abroad either. 

 

But I know that other countries see beneficial interests in selling their lands to whoever so it won't happen, Thailand is in a good spot right now. They keep their land and can expand their influence in other countries. Why would they change that?

You think that would work? The Chinese would just love that kind of bilateral agreement - they know full well the majority of Thais won't move to China, but you can bet millions of Chinese would move here - and price the average Thai out of the market. I don't see any plan being discussed coming to fruition. These ideas have ben raised before..and just get shelved. 

[Parsve]

Just a little more polished way to tell that you are a racist.

[wensiensheng]

6 hours ago, BKKTRAVELER said:

I honestly think each country should preserve the ownership of their own land. But that's not the case in many countries nowadays. But then it should bilateral agreements. If a Thai can purchase a land in the US for example, they should allow US citizens to buy land in Thailand. Since Thailand forbids any foreigner to buy their land, they shouldn't be allowed to buy land abroad either. 

 

But I know that other countries see beneficial interests in selling their lands to whoever so it won't happen, Thailand is in a good spot right now. They keep their land and can expand their influence in other countries. Why would they change that?

Expand their influence in other countries? I can’t see that happening, unless it’s being done via the medium of thai cuisine.

 

Edit: just read your response to another poster in which you references central owning land in Europe. Owning land doesn’t confer influence and the amount they own is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. And that’s a different scenario to what’s proposed anyway. Look at what Tesco used to own in Thailand before selling.

Edited September 20, 2021 by wensiensheng

[BKKTRAVELER]

3 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Expand their influence in other countries? I can’t see that happening, unless it’s being done via the medium of thai cuisine.

 

 

Well, they do own a lot in countries nearby, Cambodia (where CP is launchin their 7/11s by the way), Laos, Myanmar. But they also have bought a lot of real estate in Europe and the US. It might not amount to much in a worldscale but they are still expanding Thai interests beyond their border while others can't do it here in Thailand.

[BKKTRAVELER]

18 minutes ago, DavisH said:

You think that would work? The Chinese would just love that kind of bilateral agreement - they know full well the majority of Thais won't move to China, but you can bet millions of Chinese would move here - and price the average Thai out of the market. I don't see any plan being discussed coming to fruition. These ideas have ben raised before..and just get shelved. 

I wouldn't advise to let Chinese buy land here either but to be honest they are already doing that using proxies...

[murraynz]

7 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

It would be an extreme folly for the Thais to allow extensive foreign ownership of land.  Land is your Nation in physical form, sell it off at your peril.  They could restrict it to the building of say one official family holding and dwelling of say 1 Rai maximum. I just wish the UK government would stop selling off land and other National assets to various Russian oligarchs and Chinese criminals. It is a mistake beyond words

NZ has done the same.. 

Now they're regretting it.. 

[Marco100]

I don't see the issue ?

Cap private foreign land ownership at 2 rai . Point . 

Corporate land ownership has to go any way trou the BOI to get approved based on industrial development project .

And what's the problem of condos beeing owned in full by single privates ?

Cap it at a maximum of X condos x person or corporate .

[gk10012001]

I would advise caution to any foreigner that buys land under any new policy.  Things can change quickly

[PuaSai]

Private ownership shouldn't be an issue versus huge foreign developers coming in, buying huge lots of land, and then building more malls and condos which Thailand already has a plethora of.  Laws should be written up to specify that as a condition.  

[ThomasThBKK]

58 minutes ago, DavisH said:

You think that would work? The Chinese would just love that kind of bilateral agreement - they know full well the majority of Thais won't move to China, but you can bet millions of Chinese would move here - and price the average Thai out of the market. I don't see any plan being discussed coming to fruition. These ideas have ben raised before..and just get shelved. 

 

Chinese cannot own land in China either, only the gov can... Private ownership of land does not exist, they don't know this concept and couldn't care less about Thailands laws anyway.

 

 

 

[FarangFB]

They should just make one condition: the foreigner needs to live in the land he/she owns and that's the only property (immovable) they would be allowed to own.

 

Just like a marriage extension that you need to prove every year that you're still married with documents and photos, the land owner would have to periodically prove that he/she lives there.

[nobodysfriend]

This guy is suffering from a serious Xenophobia .

It is easy to adapt the coming changes in ownership law to Thailand's idea of it's own security . Limit the amount of land that can be owned by a foreigner and do not allow it's resale in a certain timeframe ...

There are a lot of countries I know that allow ownership of land for foreigners and none of them has ever suffered from this afaik ...