Only one winner here. 

Under normal circumstances the owner of the land decides to whom they lease their land, to what purposes it is put too and for how long. What the hell has it got to do with the government!!?? One thing and one thing only.... GREED!!

6 hours ago, Tropicalevo said:

 

Because it stops progress.

The dinosaurs are terrified of change.

Progress and change might mean their extinction.

actually it might be because they are not as stupid as western countries who allow foreigners to buy land pricing the locals out of the market... They should never allow leases more than 30 years... and they should also start enforcing the existing prescribed jail sentences for foreigners using nominee companies to buy Thai land.

26 minutes ago, Surasak said:

Under normal circumstances the owner of the land decides to whom they lease their land, to what purposes it is put too and for how long. What the hell has it got to do with the government!!?? One thing and one thing only.... GREED!!

Actually no... the landowner can only lease the land for use as designated by local zoning laws. Putting 99% leased land in govt control effectively retains the land in Thai ownership. It is a good idea. I cannot see who is being greedy here.

50 minutes ago, Zack61 said:

Only one winner here. 

you mean the Thai people right? And what is wrong with that?

7 hours ago, JoePai said:

Why do they make things so complicated !

I thought it was really simple... 99 year leased land reverts to state ownership.

6 hours ago, Tropicalevo said:

 

Because it stops progress.

The dinosaurs are terrified of change.

Progress and change might mean their extinction.

What progress has it stopped? The land still gets leased to foreigners for 99 years to be used as per the zoning laws.... 

5 hours ago, Russell17au said:

This shows how desperate this government that is lead by Thaksin's daughter is to rip the Thai people off. As I explained to my Thai wife that if she signs a 99 year lease with me on her farmland then she must sign the deed for that farmland over to the Thai Treasury Dept (Thai Government) which means the she no longer owns that farmland, it is now owned by the Thai Government who did not pay 1 Baht for the farmland. They stole it

Actually most Thai farmland was "GIVEN" to them by the government and handed down by generations where the rights of use titles are gradually upgraded to chanods. Ask your wife if her family actually bought the farmland.

1 hour ago, john donson said:

99 years, your grandkids will be probably dead too...

 

does the lease not end with the dead of the lessee ?

companies dont die

15 minutes ago, asean said:

Actually no... the landowner can only lease the land for use as designated by local zoning laws. Putting 99% leased land in govt control effectively retains the land in Thai ownership. It is a good idea. I cannot see who is being greedy here.

I did state 'Under normal circumstances. This is Thailand after all.

1 minute ago, Surasak said:

I did state 'Under normal circumstances. This is Thailand after all.

Complying with local zoning laws is normal circumstance 🙂

This is the CCP model,  where all land is state owned. Might not be such a bad idea who wants to “own” a pad of dirt in a mhuu baan?

Finance Permanent Secretary Lavaron Sangsnit might be interested to know, what happens in other places.

In Thailand they chicken around with leases, no property to non-Thais and all the rannygazoo, being afraid that those alien might roll up property, pack it into a suitcase and disappear into the dark of the night.

All the while, Tos Chirathivat, CEO of the mighty Central Group, bought yet another supermarket chain in Switzerland, Globus, with a huge plot of land on Switzerland's most expensive road, the Bahnhofstrasse in Zurich. The deal benefits of the very strong Thai Baht and the transaction is valued at something between 37 and 40 billion (not million) Thai Baht; Central became the sole owner of this prime property, no strings attached. 

Maybe Thailand's economy in the real estate sector might inch out of its medieval mindset and modernise its property laws and ownership concepts to the 21st century of a globalized world 😉 

6 hours ago, brianthainess said:

Thais should be banned from owning properties overseas, along with any other country that won't let 'falang own property' it pushes the price of property up for those countries citizens.

I agree. Foreigners are free to buy land or real estate in France, including thai people. This should only be possible if there is reciprocity. Same for businesses.

Absolutely no justification for the state to insert itself into the transactions or for the Finance Ministry to get involved. Just amend the Land Code to allow the maximum lease to be 99 years.  Then the land reverts to the original owner or heirs However, without more detailed leasing law, this will still not work very well. Lessees need the right to transfer the lease to buyers or leave it heirs which is not automatically possible without the freeholder's consent. Since a Thai lease is just a legal agreement between two parties, it is not binding on anyone else, including new owners of the freehold.  That should be tidied up.

 

99 year leases are also of interest to Thais for land that the owners want to keep permanently in the estate but this obviously will not help them,

3 hours ago, asean said:

companies dont die

 

Companies die all the time. 

 

Wouldn't it be a kick in the nuts for a family to sign their land over to the gub'ment as proposed, then the lease holder quits paying after 6 months?  Not only does the family not get the rent payments.  They also don't own the land any more.

 

The only way I can see that work is to require a lease payment up front, at least equal to the value of the land.  Or a clause that the land reverts to the family, if the lease payments stop before the value of the land is recovered.  Or possibly buying insurance, against lease payments ending.  That would be yet another can of gub'ment worms.

 

18 hours ago, Tarteso said:

I wouldn’t buy a land in Thailand.

 

You wouldn't with a lease.

18 hours ago, brianthainess said:

I don't understand why if I pay for a 99yr lease it should then be claimed by the State, I know I'm getting old but .....

Couldn't your wife inherit the lease?

14 hours ago, asean said:

Actually most Thai farmland was "GIVEN" to them by the government and handed down by generations where the rights of use titles are gradually upgraded to chanods. Ask your wife if her family actually bought the farmland.

Yes, my wife's family (grandfather) did buy the farmland. It was not bought from the government. it was bought from the previous private owner who had all the legal land documents.

How can an ex convicted fugitive be allowed to make such proposals he should be allowed within the boundaries of any government offices

The grand kids will curse that 99 year lease every day they they are reporting to work at McDonalds because the family is now landless after 99 years...

55555, anything about foreigners owning Thai land--even with a 99 year lease, never going to happen. Or maybe it'll go on the books as law but it will be so difficult to navigate all the hurdles it won't be worth it. Kind of like the law that foreigners can own one rai of land for a personal dwelling, been hearing that off and on for 30+ years.

The law must change and all foreigners who have leased their houses must be allowed to buy the plot of the land. Until this happens, foreigners are well aware never to buy a house on leasehold in Thailand. Lot's of revenue that is getting lost for Thailand. Westerners are buying in other countries in Asia now for retirement and even in India.

On 9/30/2024 at 12:04 PM, Gottfrid said:

I fail to understand why any land would need to be transferred to the Treasury Department, if not as @Russell17au post above. The only thing needed for a lease to be legal, would be a registration at Department of Land & Transportation (DLT). Besides that, they just need to stipulate which ways or purpose of use to lease the land are forbidden.

 

That's funny, please go to the DLT to try and register anything to do with land ownership.

 

DLT is the  Department of Land Transport !

 

What is the Land Department?

 

The Land Department (in Thai: กรมที่ดิน) is the government agency responsible for issuance of land title deeds, registration of real estate transactions in Thailand and land topography and cartography matters. As a matter of legal formality and for the legal effect, Thais and foreigners entering into transactions concerning real estate (including transactions involving land, buildings and condominium units) in Thailand generally must (with an exception for short term leases) register the transactions with this agency.

2 hours ago, bigt3116 said:

That's funny, please go to the DLT to try and register anything to do with land ownership.

 

DLT is the  Department of Land Transport !

 

What is the Land Department?

You are a little bit after, as I already dealt with that error, but you just took a bite without reading finish. You little shark!

Nothing to see here. Money grab, give NOTHING! And am all for that because the Thai state will get as ruined as ours’. Just as long as they don’t expect to own land on OUR turf!

On 9/30/2024 at 12:12 PM, itsari said:

I believe that Thailand has to do what ever it can to discourage foreign ownership to avoid the ridiculous prices that are paid for property in the west .

 

If you look at how much land is undeveloped in Thailand, and the prices that are charged, then prices in Thailand are more ridiculous than in the West already.

1 hour ago, CallumWK said:

 

If you look at how much land is undeveloped in Thailand, and the prices that are charged, then prices in Thailand are more ridiculous than in the West already.

If you take your theory on undeveloped land to say Canada where you have so much more area than Thailand compared to the population yet housing is unaffordable that makes your statement look silly .Canada now restricts foreigners from buying property.

People want to live where they can find work and have the benefits of a modern lifestyle. Living in the sticks is not for most people.

If you said land is expensive for the average Thai with their low income I would agree with you.

If you do not restrict foreigners from buying land in Thailand you risk creating huge resentment amongst the Thai people as they see owning property is beyond them.