8 hours ago, FlorC said:

Must be prime location at 16 M THB/rai in Krabi.

It’s different plots in over 20 locations 🙈

4 hours ago, Tequila makes me happy said:

I've been coming to Thailand since the 90's and these nominee coy. deals were advertised openly way back then as a legal work around for land ownership. It has been so blatantly promoted I believed it was accepted by the authorities as a legitimate solution.

You are correct, but as I have said in the past, the day will come when many here will be left holding the can when the Thai's pull this ace out of their sleeve and start confiscating properties that foreigners bought in good faith.

I actually thought it would be a hard right wing politician that would stand on a platform of "Returning Thai Land to Thai People" at election time, and then deliver.

Buying property in Thailand is all risk and no reward.

I had my wife confiscated from me a few years ago. The mom and dad gladely signed off on my marriage. Then after ten years after land, home, car was bought Mom and dad came in kidnaped my wife and I lost everything. I did see them in my Fortuner when they passed me. Dad was driving my new Fortuner, mom was in the passenger seat and my kidnapped wife was giving me the finger... :)

Edited Monday at 12:49 PM2 days by Gknrd

4 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

You are correct, but as I have said in the past, the day will come when many here will be left holding the can when the Thai's pull this ace out of their sleeve and start confiscating properties that foreigners bought in good faith.

I actually thought it would be a hard right wing politician that would stand on a platform of "Returning Thai Land to Thai People" at election time, and then deliver.

Buying property in Thailand is all risk and no reward.

I have been coming to and living in Thailand since 1989 and always knew foreign ownership of Thai land was illegal. But, then I was living with and engaging with Thais not really other foreigners. Personally, I think everyone knew it was illegal, but thought that it was OK because Thailand didn't really enforce the law. That worked for a while until Thailand became popular with foreigners and foreign ownership of land, especially in popular tourist destinations, became such that locals were pushed out of and priced out of ownership in certain areas. Foreigners also started buying land and starting businesses in these tourist areas again pushing Thais out. It is no wonder that Thailand is now pushing back. I think that part of the problem has to do with law firms that helped negotiate these deals, and they should be punished as well, but I think everyone involved always knew that it was technically illegal.

While I would love to be able to buy and own a piece of land in Thailand, I fully agree with the Thai law that restricts ownership to Thai's only. Otherwise, wealthier foreigners would eventually own large areas of Thailand and it would no longer be Thailand.

12 hours ago, Legal Lifeline said:

Unfortunately the advice received I received about 4 weeks ago from a good Thai lawyer who handles a lot of property and criminal law suggests you may well be wrong

Perhaps, what's being discussed here is the proposed Land Code Section 94 changes.

Which would need voting on in parliament I believe as it is an act of parliament. Could they try the 'memo' approach here?

Even then they have a choice in how to word the act, normally an act which has penalties would apply from some specified date on or after the date of the vote, like the gazetted date or Jan 1, the following year

Anyone speaking of confiscation by the sate is speculating on this change in the act of parliament which may be coming.....but it doesn't exist right now.

20 hours ago, shackleton said:

This dates back when corruption was okay pay off people in the right positions

But things have now changed for the better a few people are going to find out at their cost it does not work anymore for some 😱

I suspect it still goes on, but the prices went up!

So looks like the city tax coffers will benefit greatly from the transfer taxes all being paid in a short time.

The Debate on if the selling price will be any Deal is up in the air. Desirable properties in prime areas I think will retain most of their Value.

Others will be a mixed bag.

I can guarantee there are wealthy people, businesses, looking into any potential desirable property being available to grab it.

7 hours ago, ukrules said:

Anyone speaking of confiscation by the sate is speculating on this change in the act of parliament which may be coming.....but it doesn't exist right now.

This is true. However, as the proposal is currently structured, the only person in further harm's way is the foreigner who illegitimately commenced the nominee structure.

11 hours ago, Issan girl said:

I have been coming to and living in Thailand since 1989 and always knew foreign ownership of Thai land was illegal. But, then I was living with and engaging with Thais not really other foreigners. Personally, I think everyone knew it was illegal, but thought that it was OK because Thailand didn't really enforce the law. That worked for a while until Thailand became popular with foreigners and foreign ownership of land, especially in popular tourist destinations, became such that locals were pushed out of and priced out of ownership in certain areas. Foreigners also started buying land and starting businesses in these tourist areas again pushing Thais out. It is no wonder that Thailand is now pushing back. I think that part of the problem has to do with law firms that helped negotiate these deals, and they should be punished as well, but I think everyone involved always knew that it was technically illegal.

While I would love to be able to buy and own a piece of land in Thailand, I fully agree with the Thai law that restricts ownership to Thai's only. Otherwise, wealthier foreigners would eventually own large areas of Thailand and it would no longer be Thailand.

I've never subscribed to the theory that "everyone else is doing it, so it must be ok."

When I researched it, I discovered not only was it illegal, and not only did I have very few, if any, rights, but it also made no economic sense, so decided renting was the best option. As I have said before, the saying "rent is dead money " is not true in Thailand.

Thailand's foreign ownership of property laws have now put them in a difficult position. On one hand, they want that huge inflow of foreign investment cash that property brings in, but on the other hand they don't want the foreigner to actually own the land that the cash is used to buy. How do you have one, without the other. Historically, Thailand has always liked to work in the grey. This is so they can allow it today, but disallow it tomorrow.

If they slowly, but surely, start to confiscate all of these illegal properties, foreign investors will lose confidence in property investment in Thailand, the way I did, or, take their money elsewhere Eg. Vietnam, or simply leave it in their home country at 5% interest and rent here.

So, picture very few new condo projects starting, therefore a slow down in the construction industry, therefore unemployment, a slow down in construction materials manufacturing, loss of taxes for government etc etc. The flow on effect is huge from a contracting construction industry.

So, do they change the goal posts and screw over those who previously bought and go full legal here, scaring off future investors, or do they allow the illegal practice to continue and use selective enforcement to knock off a few foreigners every now and then and rely on the complacency of future buyers that "It will never happened to me" and "everyone else is doing it, so it must be ok."

It will be interesting to see which way they go, particularly as tourism is way down in Thailand, but way up in Vietnam.

Basically, allowing that "grey area" and illegality in the property market here to go on for so long, it's now put Thailand in an difficult position. Thailand has to chose between stability, rule of law, and confidence in the market, or risk losing, on a grand scale, foreign property investors, which has the potential to crash the property market here.

On 7/27/2026 at 3:18 AM, thailand49 said:

Let's point at the real people and that is the Mainland Chinese, Hong Kong, who the leaders invited prior to Covid, during Covid and after Covid. It is give people an inch they will take a foot and so forth.

This been brewing since they realized that the Chinese Triads had taken control of half the provinces in Thailand. Then the banking debacle scam by BB in Pattaya.

Now although it seems these projects are large it doesn't hit or begin to clean up stuff since the riches of the rich are involved in these nominee's that will never be touch, when that building fell in Bangkok that started it but the investigation raids will never reach that high.

There's something less offensive to Thais about being taken over by Chinese people than it being farangs and Israelis. The Thai-Chinese have dominated the economy here for a very long time, so it's really just the same old thing. At least the Chinese understand the culture better than farang and Israelis do, and I think that it was the latter two that forced the government to take the most recent action. You're correct that it probably won't reach up very high, just high enough to get the media off their backs.

4 hours ago, flaming dragon said:

There's something less offensive to Thais about being taken over by Chinese people than it being farangs and Israelis. The Thai-Chinese have dominated the economy here for a very long time, so it's really just the same old thing. At least the Chinese understand the culture better than farang and Israelis do, and I think that it was the latter two that forced the government to take the most recent action. You're correct that it probably won't reach up very high, just high enough to get the media off their backs.

Yes, you are correct in my own experience of course talking about bargirls etc, isn't a good comparison. I've been told by many even civilians when out with you I'm not look at like a working girl. I got the best of both worlds LOL, I'm Chinese and American!

I being first generation, been and live on my Grandparents villiage in China, then you take the Thai food aside from the spice pretty much same as Chinese in my book. Thais, leader have in the past refer to the Chinese as their brothers. As you note they have been here a long time but not the same as taking over.

If you way back heard the tale of the Massage King of Thailand who turn politician, he was so call mafia had his regular place to eat, his own table one day he went in owner told him he had to wait pissed that he when he sounded the alarm that his country was being sold to the Chinese! LOL

On 7/27/2026 at 6:29 AM, Patong2021 said:

These types of arrangements were ALWAYS illegal and not recent. There was a pause during Covid, but enforcement came back after the crisis. https://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/2023/12/20/several-properties-in-chiang-mai-are-confiscated-after-being-linked-to-chinese-nominees/

Some people were able to get away with it for years, but it was only a matter of time before the house of cards would come tumbling down. A reading of the old Thai visa forum will show multiple warnings about the risks of this type of activity. The people who warned about the consequences were often dismissed as cowards, or know it alls. My legal counsel told me it was illegal except under specific circumsatances and that there would eventually be a day of reckoning. He has been proven right, but then, he was an actual experienced legal counsel and not someone with a conflict of interest, pushing real estate sales.

Foreigners have been allowed to purchase land decades, but it has strict conditions;

- Purchase must be done as per a treaty allowance.

-Only foreigners who bring in the capital for investment of more than 40 million Baht are allowed.

-Land size cannot exceed 1 rai.

- Approved by the Minister.

Unfortunately there are no surviving bilateral treaties allowing nationals of a foreign country to own land in Thailand on a reciprocal basis. The last treaty was rescinded in the early 1970s.

Despite the amendment to the Land code in 1999 that permitted a foreigner to own 1 rai of residential land in certain zones, on condition of an investment of at least 40 million baht, excluding said investment in land there are no confirmed cases of an interior minister ever having approved such a request. Various people have claimed they knew of a case or two where this happened but none of these claims have been verified. The interior ministry took 4 years to write the necessary ministerial regulations and dragged its feet until none of Bank of Thailand bonds or property funds that could be used to fulfill the 40 million investment criterion existed any more.

There is one more but it applies to companies. Foreign BOI promoted companies are allowed to buy land for their projects and to build a house for the CEO. However, these land privileges are only valid for the life of the BOI promotion which is limited life and can be rescinded by the BOI at any time. Therefore BOI companies often don't bother taking up the right to buy land because it is of a temporary, subject to early cancellation.

I wonder why the Brit's full name is not provided. It must be publicly available at the DBD under any of the companies he is a shareholder or director of.

everybody is speaking about the foreigners but as I see it the lawyers and the nominees should also be taken accountable, the foreigners were trying to bypass the law but they could/wouldn't do it on their own, lawyers helped circumvent the law by creating the companies and finding the nominees, thus complicit and should be in jail as they broke the law, or are Thais allowed to brake the law and not get punished, all 3 parties involved should be taken accountable or maybe 4 people involved as I think the lawyers to do what they did they must have had somebody at the land department

10 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

everybody is speaking about the foreigners but as I see it the lawyers and the nominees should also be taken accountable,

As posted earlier:

For almost all Foreign Business Act and Land Code statutes there is statute limitations of 5 - 10 years depending upon the proscribed criminal penalties unless an entity is filing documents currently on behalf of the foreigner's interest.

NB with the Krabi matter at issue, as per the OP the British national registered a company in 2000 with Thai shareholders.

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by JerryM

3 hours ago, JerryM said:

As posted earlier:

For almost all Foreign Business Act and Land Code statutes there is statute limitations of 5 - 10 years depending upon the proscribed criminal penalties unless an entity is filing documents currently on behalf of the foreigner's interest.

NB with the Krabi matter at issue, as per the OP the British national registered a company in 2000 with Thai shareholders.

Where's the enforcement stopping the lawyers from doing it in 2026?