Proposal would allow foreigners in Thailand to own 1 rai of land – but there’s a 40 million baht catch

[skorp13]

Just a ploy to be able to say " yes foreigners can own land in Thailand"! They already know they're not going to sell much of it to foreigners.

[mvdf]

For $900k less, you can get a 10 yr Golden Visa just across the border + citizenship after 5 years. 

 

https://cm2h.com/our-services/

 

 

 

 

[Burma Bill]

Aimed at the Saudi Arabian oil sheiks - Thailand's new "quality tourist" friends?????

[xtrnuno41]

Have piles of money lying around here and thought what can i do with it.

But ok now i know, go live in Thailand in a house on 1 rai.

Guess, Mr. Nipon had some yabba pills.

????

[Enzian]

1 hour ago, skorp13 said:

Just a ploy to be able to say " yes foreigners can own land in Thailand"!

Just like the renewal of stay form that asks your basic reason, there are boxes to check but no box with the word "retirement" next to it, just "other". Absurd because retirement is the reason so many have to use that form. You can write "by reason of retirement" on the line below, but does anyone read it? So Thailand can offer a way to retire here, but at the same time tell themselves that there is no such thing as a "retirement visa", and be correct.

[VBF]

7 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

And, how do you figure that? What is so hard with visa for staying in Thailand, if you live up to the requirements, that will say?

 

You know, you can´t take out money in a bank without ID either, but if you live up to the requirements it´s no problem.

I think perhaps the point @RichardColeman was making is that the rules (ie "requirements") can and do change as if on a whim. Very hard to survive that if your life savings have been wiped out and your property misappropriated. 

[Autonuaq]

Good idea of course.

Only the Thai seem to have forgotten that the foreigners who they target with this are the once that are able to invest 40 million in Thailand, those are in general also to once who have land plot beyond several to live on.

 

 

[digger70]

8 hours ago, Purdey said:

No mention of permanent residents, who do not need to transfer money from abroad.

Readers may be interested to look into usafruct agreements if you have a Thai spouse. I read abou it on this site many years ago. Buy in his/her name, sign an usufruct agreement and have full rights to live in and use the property for the rest of your life. More reasonable, I think.

Yes ,that's right. My GF Lady Digger and I have done a usufruct like that  years ago.

 

The person who enters into a contractual agreement with the owner for this right is called the "usufructuary". Section 1418 of the Civil and Commercial Code provides that a usufruct may be created for a period of time or for the life of the usufructuary. A usufruct will be registered in a similar manner to a lease of up to 30 years or until the lifetime of the usufructuary.

[scorecard]

56 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Yes ,that's right. My GF Lady Digger and I have done a usufruct like that  years ago.

 

The person who enters into a contractual agreement with the owner for this right is called the "usufructuary". Section 1418 of the Civil and Commercial Code provides that a usufruct may be created for a period of time or for the life of the usufructuary. A usufruct will be registered in a similar manner to a lease of up to 30 years or until the lifetime of the usufructuary.

Example: The owner stated on the chanut for the land for our family house is recorded as my adult Thai son. The house same. Guess where the funds (many millions of Baht) came from.

 

At request of my Thai son our family lawyer family recorded a usufruct on the chanut. It states:

- The person shown on the usufruct (me) can live in the house until I decide to move or until my death.

- Son cannot sell the land without my written permission.

- Further to points just above, If my son dies his will states that the land/house is automatically owned equally/jointly by his children. The usufruct specifically mentions this and also specifically mentions that my rights to live in the house until death and the need for my written permission for the children to sell the land remains. This collapses of course if I pass away.

                  _____________________________________________

 

Background: My son has big concerns (for good reasons*) that his wifes family will try to gain ownership of the land and house when he passes away. My son did his research about 'usufruct' then went to the lawyer we use (lawyer wrote son's will) and son asked the lawyer to prepare a 'usufruct' which provides everything I wrote above the broken line.

 

Lawyer did her research and said it was possible and she discussed the above with the snr. at the local Land Titles Office who agreed it would be fully legal. Then quickly added to the chanut.

 

(*Son's in laws (nasty greedy unscrupulous assxxxxx) have several times stated that they will automatically own the land/house owned by my son when son passes away (they have stated that son's wife will be part owner but any decisions on selling etc., will be taken by the 2 oldest siblings of son's wife (15 - 18 years older than son's wife). They are adamant that it will be as above because that's specifically the law in Thailand. The first time they riaised this my son and his wife went to the family lawyer, she stated categorically this is not true. She then took my son and his wife to visit the snr. officer at the local LTO, he quickly agreed 'there is no such law'.) 

[Harveyboy]

but why worry about putting land in your own name ..all the risk investment of 40 million just put it in your wife's name no hassles.. She's going to get it anyway eh

[overherebc]

35 minutes ago, Harveyboy said:

but why worry about putting land in your own name ..all the risk investment of 40 million just put it in your wife's name no hassles.. She's going to get it anyway eh

Doesn't the same happen in uk/usa etc??  You pop your clogs wife gets house.

[Jimbo551]

10 hours ago, billsmart said:

I've been told, and by some Thai real estate lawyers, that US citizens can own 1 rai of land as a result of an agreement/treaty made between Thailand and the US during WWII. Has anyone else heard this or know anything more about it? ????

Quote

Misconceptions re Amity Treaty between Thailand and the US

It is commonly thought that this treaty allows US Citizens the right to own land in Thailand. This is not true and is specifically excluded in the treaty. In brief under the treaty, Thailand restricts American investment from the following fields of business:

1.   Communications

2.   Transportation

3.   Fiduciary functions

4.   Banking involving depository functions

5.   Exploitation of land and natural resources

6.   Owning land; and

7.   Domestic trade in agricultural products.

 

[Arkady]

5 hours ago, Purdey said:

Thanks. Got the usufruct the same time as buying the house at the Land Department. An usufruct is not a separation of land and house. I have the right to use the whole property. The Land Department officer was not happy “giving Thai land to a foreigner” and asked my wife if she wanted to limit it to 30 years. My wife said no, All life.

An usufruct cannot be canceled as it is an official document issued by government and a contract between the owner and myself.

(Edit)

just want to add that anyone considering an usufruct should contact a lawyer for their peace of mind.

You're lucky you got the usufruct. Some land offices, particularly upcountry, will simply refuse to do it and the director of registrations has the discretion to do whatever he likes where foreigners are involved. How easy it would be enforce a usufruct against a hostile Thai wife or ex or her heirs, if she is deceased particularly if the property is in their village, would depend on individual cases. And yes you should do it before you are married, if possible, because the Civil & Commercial Code provides for annulment of a contract between husband and wife, if one of them can convince the judge they were taken advantage of by the other.

 

Some can still get away with using Thai companies but this has been made much harder since the Interior Minister issued new instructions to land offices to try to prevent foreigners from using a corporate ownership structure. Basically the land officers were ordered to reject any transfers to companies that any overt or suspected foreign involvement.  Thai nominees can be quizzed as to what is the business plan of the company and why do they want to invest their entire paid up capital in a resort villa with infinity pool.

[unblocktheplanet]

40mil is not so much. But it sure raises the bar for ordinary Thais wanting to own land. Just like it did in Hongcouver. Our young people will never own their own homes. Foreigners should NOT own land in Thailand.

[Arkady]

11 hours ago, billsmart said:

I've been told, and by some Thai real estate lawyers, that US citizens can own 1 rai of land as a result of an agreement/treaty made between Thailand and the US during WWII. Has anyone else heard this or know anything more about it? ????

This was true once but those lawyers are out of date. The Treaty was revised in 1966 and the right to own land was deleted at the request of the Thai side, while the US side raised no objections as they were of the opinion that US citizens and corporates at the time had little interest in owning land in Thailand, a country that looked like it could easily fall under communist rule. The US side was also persuaded by the Thai government that Thai small land holders, particularly upcountry, were a key bedrock against communism and that foreign land ownership could cause resentment and upset this dynamic. In the previous version of the treaty signed in 1920 US citizens were allowed to own land in Thailand, as long as Thais were allowed to own land in the states they came from. This provision had been insisted on by the Thai side because many US states had iniquitous provisions preventing Asians from owning land until the Supreme Court deemed these laws unconstitutional in 1958. There was a great deal of fear and resentment against Chinese and Japanese immigrants in the US and states enacted laws to prevent Asians from owning land to discourage them from settling. Federal law also preventing them from gaining citizenship in the early 20th century which was used as the basis of these land laws.

 

The residual wording in the Land Code re treaty ownership of land is still there, even though the other 12 foreign treaties that permitted foreign land ownership had all be revoked and not renewed by 1970.  The US was the only foreign power that had bargaining power over Thailand by that stage and the Thais knew that, if they could get the US to give up it land ownership rights, the other countries would be forced to follow suit.

 

The treaty owned land was grandfathered when the treaties were revoked and up until the late 80s there were still some notable treaty owned plots in Bangkok. HSBC and Standard Chartered Bank had lavish managers' houses in Sathorn and Wireless Roads respectively, although they head been divided into flats for senior management by the tme they fell under the wrecking ball. East Asiatic Co Ltd owned a prime property on the river that was originally godowns and is now Asiatique. There is probably more but the only remaining treaty owned land I am aware of today is the British Club on Silom Road which is owned by its ordinary members.

[rebo]

11 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

… it's a "developing country" …

Oh you charmer …!

[4MyEgo]

4 minutes ago, rebo said:

Oh you charmer …!

[newnative]

Always an idiotic 'catch'.  

[StevieAus]

12 hours ago, Purdey said:

No mention of permanent residents, who do not need to transfer money from abroad.

Readers may be interested to look into usafruct agreements if you have a Thai spouse. I read abou it on this site many years ago. Buy in his/her name, sign an usufruct agreement and have full rights to live in and use the property for the rest of your life. More reasonable, I think.

That’s what I did years ago with our home and adjoining land plus our motel and apartments.

Once I depart this world I will have no need for them as I wouldn’t if I lived in Australia or elsewhere.

[KIngsofisaan]

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

40mil is not so much. But it sure raises the bar for ordinary Thais wanting to own land. Just like it did in Hongcouver. Our young people will never own their own homes. Foreigners should NOT own land in Thailand.

How does expat requirements to own 1 rai of land for a 40 million baht investment impact ordinary Thai's wanting to own land?

 

Who do you think owns all the land in Thailand?

 

I see a ton of ordinay Thai's in Isaan owning their own land.

[CLUBBER]

16 hours ago, RandiRona said:

Lol...another useless half cooked scheme from deputy interior minister.

Hard pass!!

???????????? This clown show just keeps getting better????

[KIngsofisaan]

12 hours ago, jacko45k said:

My point is that you may trust her absolutely, but that is a far cry from her being deserving of it! I was having a discussion along those lines only yesterday.... elderly Western men seem to lose it when they are getting loving attention from a 25 year old! 

Beware dimwits.

 

Who in the right mind marries someone undeserving?

[KIngsofisaan]

12 hours ago, jacko45k said:

It does happen...... 

I knew one Thai lady, who was not a youngster but seemed to attract men quite well,  was on her 4th relationship where she had got money and property from men who simply let her control everything... Darwinism it might be, but my point about giving absolute trust too easily,  is the only comment I make. 

You knew one Thai lady out of a Thai population of 66,000,000 and then you quote it as fact?

[itsari]

14 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Very little point in owning any land with the visas here. You could well find yourself owning land and being barred from entry. 

Same could be said about any immigrant in any country .

[kimamey]

13 hours ago, Bert got kinky said:

 

Proposal would allow foreigners in Thailand to own 1 rai of land

Or just marry a Thai lady that you want to spend the rest of your life with and who you trust absolute.

 

That's fine so long as she doesn't die first. I think it gets complicated then. If my wife has this right of she dies then everything is split between her daughter and me. The problem is of course that the half of the land that I would then own I have to sell as I can't own it. I think I'd have 6 months. What I'd do if course is give my half to her daughter. 

The be honest it's not my wife or her family that's the problem. It the Thai government. 

[KIngsofisaan]

We have accumulated 26 rai in Isaan and a 4/3 western house, tractors, trucks, etc.

 

I could care less whose name it is in.

 

Once the money was spent, it was gone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[hotandsticky]

1 hour ago, KIngsofisaan said:

You knew one Thai lady out of a Thai population of 66,000,000 and then you quote it as fact?

 

….and you think there is only one?

 

Add the 3 that I know to the list.

[hotandsticky]

29 minutes ago, kimamey said:

That's fine so long as she doesn't die first. I think it gets complicated then. If my wife has this right of she dies then everything is split between her daughter and me. The problem is of course that the half of the land that I would then own I have to sell as I can't own it. I think I'd have 6 months. What I'd do if course is give my half to her daughter. 

The be honest it's not my wife or her family that's the problem. It the Thai government. 

You have a year - a pointless exercise IMO.

 

Far better to arrange a usufruct/superficary.

[hotandsticky]

19 minutes ago, KIngsofisaan said:

We have accumulated 26 rai in Isaan.

 

Farming rice which is not profitable due to goes to feed a rather large extended family and what is left to sell is barely enough for my FIL to have any money at all. Forced to sell the rice to a "mafia" middle man at ridiculously low prices. (if you don't understand how that works, then you have never lived in rural Isaan. I am not talking a city in Isaan like Udan Thai or Khon Kaen).

 

With a 4/3 western house, vegetable gardens, outdoor Lania area under roof, a couple of wells, large tractors, etc. I doubt we could ever sell the place anywhere close to what it is worth and maybe not be able to sell it at all due to cost. I think no one in their right mind would spend that much to live  that far out in rural Isaan?

 

So, how did we end up there? My wife has 100+ relatives in the same tiny village. We got married in that tiny village and that is where she wanted to stay. I do not hate the place, maybe just outgrown it? In the beginning it was her dream and I made it happen. Never have 1 regret for that decision.

 

So do I care it is in my younger wife's name? No, not one bit. 

 

Due I care it is not in my own name? Never gave 1 concern to it. Why?

 

We made decisions years and years ago what we wanted and thought best at the time. Sorry to all you men that hate and don't trust their Thai wives. I would do anything for mine and I did. Never one regret to build there, some of the best times of our lives.

 

Times change and what I think about today (2022) is not what I planned on way back when. There are lots of things when you are young you never think about and lots of things as you get older you think about every day.

 

I am not that starry eyed lad that came here moons ago, married the queen of Isaan and thought land, house, everything was my dream.

 

I certaintly don't want to die in Isaan. I would like to live as long as I can. Health care and quick access to emergency services are on my mind these days.

 

Own a house abroad, and after spending more time there during covid, it is what suits us now better than Isaan. Over the years my wife became a US citizen and she has adapted to western ways and embraced them. I was in and out of the VA hospital all during covid, with all kinds of issues (Non covid related) and that opened my eyes to the importance of health and medical care.

 

Once the money was spent in Isaan all those years ago, to me, it was gone. I never expected it to be an investment and it never will be. So me personally, it doesn't matter whose name it is in. I never counted on it being anything. For some they would think I spent alot, but it did not break the bank by any means and I knew once spent it was gone. Hasn't changed our finacial level or the way we live at all, not even today.

 

Our house abroad has tripled in that time, so we are not short by any means. 

 

If it is indeed a lost financial cost, my FIL, BIL and other relatives are getting the benefit now and maybe long into the future. Farming is the only skill they have. I do not feel bad if in the end they get a fine place to live and farm to earn a small living. We are a close knit family, none of the drama issues so famous here on TV.

 

Some folks I have read, already had a plan to return home in old age >75 and had planned accordingly. 

 

We never really planned to go back full time, but as the years rolled on, we get older and priorities change. We just know the day will come when we do go back for good and we plan for that accordingly.

 

No hate at all for Thailand. some of the best times of my life here. Met my wife here.

 

But I am a realist. I don't have to make up stories to tell me how cheap or how great Thailand is. 

 

I am certaintly not a loser or I can't hack it, if we decide to move on.

 

I didn't trap myself financially. Too much uncertainty in the third world to think things will stay the same forever.

 

As far as 40,000,000 for 1 rai? Only a fool could come up with that idea and think it would be a good idea.

 

You would never be able to sell your 1 rai for anything, so what exactly is the sense of having it in YOUR name?

 

if you have 40,000,000 baht, you could have a dream retirement anywhere you chose around the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heartfelt words.

[KIngsofisaan]

7 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

….and you think there is only one?

 

Add the 3 that I know to the list.

Can you do math?

 

What are the odds of 3 out of 66,000,000?

 

Better go buy a boatload of lotto tickets!