Association Of Foreigners In Thailand

[JetsetBkk]

if anyone was allowed to buy here then its possible that in some areas that local people would be driven out due to higher prices. There is far more foreign people and companys that would buy land here compared to Thai people and companys looking to buy in the U.K.

Someone retired here with several years consecutive extensions - e.g. 5 years continuous stay in Thailand - ought to be allowed to buy 1 rai of land freehold as permanent private residence. No companies, no business, just private residence - and only one per person.

[madjbs]

Yes I agree with you that long term residents should be allowed to buy land for a house.

[pop3]

If the UK had the same visa and land ownership as this place it wouldn't be the joke it is today.

[draggons]

What's with all the "we want this we want that?" We, each and every one of us, choose to come and live here and if we didn't know the visa restrictions etc then more fool us. What right as forginers do we have to try to dictate that we want anything? If you're not happy with the way things are for us then what's stopping you moving back to your contry of origin?, no one stopping you.

Pop3 sums it up, as far as the UK goes. The village I came from in the highlands the local youngsters can not afford to buy a house in the village, or within a fifty mile radius, due to incomers buying up land and houses. Doesn't matter where in Thailand you allowed foringers to own their own land it would push out the indidunous people, there's no way they could compete with the money available to the average farang.

Sure I'd love to be safe in the knowlage that I'm not going to be kicked out at some point and loose everything but to be honest I've not come up against any problems "yet"

[think_too_mut]

Thinktoomut,

We have gone over that many times. If thailand was as difficult to get into as the USA then there would be no foreign tourists.

And Thais do what? 30 days visa, come in, enjoy your time and go back.

How about that for Thais going to America?

Tourism is about 10% of foreign income. If the west reduces their trips (as they did, Prague and other destinations where tatooed thugs go on low cost airlines for fun) , there are Chinese, Taiwanese, Hong Kong...nobody in Thai would cry if they are left with the Asians only. Could even be preferred.

[ronigere]

And if they did, so what? There is very few Thais that would buy land in the U.K. Even if they did it wouldnt effect prices much. On the other hand if anyone was allowed to buy here then its possible that in some areas that local people would be driven out due to higher prices. There is far more foreign people and companys that would buy land here compared to Thai people and companys looking to buy in the U.K.

[ronigere]

And if they did, so what? There is very few Thais that would buy land in the U.K. Even if they did it wouldnt effect prices much. On the other hand if anyone was allowed to buy here then its possible that in some areas that local people would be driven out due to higher prices. There is far more foreign people and companys that would buy land here compared to Thai people and companys looking to buy in the U.K.

COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH,NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPERS ITS ABOUT HAVING A HOUSE THAT BELONGS TO YOU WITH OUT LOSING IT IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG WITH YOUR RELATIONSHIP IN LAW NOT SPECULATING AND DEVELOPING LAND FOR PROFIT

[KKK]

Regarding foriengers buying land in Thailand....

Personally I would like to see this happen with perhaps a controlled maximum of 1 rai which would be better then the work-arounds that happen all the time with thais buying it then handing over control to a farang by way of long-term lease. After all its not who owns the land that matters its what happens to land.

What however makes more sense to me is:

If Thailand considers it inappropriate for non-thais to own land in Thailand then it should also consider it inappropriate for Thais to own land outside Thailand and create laws forbidding them to do so with the penalty being loss of citizenship. The law as it stands is two-faced: "Do as we say; not as we do".

[thai_narak]

Regarding foriengers buying land in Thailand....

Personally I would like to see this happen with perhaps a controlled maximum of 1 rai which would be better then the work-arounds that happen all the time with thais buying it then handing over control to a farang by way of long-term lease. After all its not who owns the land that matters its what happens to land.

What however makes more sense to me is:

If Thailand considers it inappropriate for non-thais to own land in Thailand then it should also consider it inappropriate for Thais to own land outside Thailand and create laws forbidding them to do so with the penalty being loss of citizenship. The law as it stands is two-faced: "Do as we say; not as we do".

there will be chaos if all farangs are able to own 1 rai of land. imagine 1 million farangs buying 1 rai each... so i don't agree on this. BUT, i would like to see that the land ownership be relaxed for the farangs who are LEGALLY MARRIED to thais (be it male or female) that they should be able to own a land (residential) as in 50/50 share/ownership with their local wives/husband and their name be included in the resident certicate or tabien ban. if this is the case, now, it makes sense that when something happens like divorce, the property can then be shared equally to both the foreign spouse and local wife. furthermore, the couples should only be allowed with limited land ownership not for business, etc.

Edited October 15, 2007 by thai_narak

[thomo]

Association Of Foreigners In Thailand, A group lobbying for better laws for Expats

Good luck.

They've been around collecting donations for years.... what have they accomplished?

To get a couple of thick-as-a-brick farangs to give them money for nothing then spend it on whiskey and whores I'd imagine.

Hey, it would be better spent.

[solo siam]

Interesting organization, however, Thailand being what it is I would be worried signing up unless a Thai of high status endorse it first.

About their website, interesting, but the top-right section is worrying:

Your IP Address Is

LOGGED & RECORDED

Back from this IP :-

124.157.xxx.xxx

I know IP address is always logged but I think it's unwise to put it into your face this way for a site like this.

speak up and get deported ,thats the attitude of the thai's ,sign up when the coup is over ,that way you may live longer .

lol, so you're saying that the current Thai authorities are murdering the people that sign up to this website? This sites becoming so full of garbage, written by people with some sort of anti-Thai agenda because they can't live here, or got cheated by some girl.

[madjbs]

And if they did, so what? There is very few Thais that would buy land in the U.K. Even if they did it wouldnt effect prices much. On the other hand if anyone was allowed to buy here then its possible that in some areas that local people would be driven out due to higher prices. There is far more foreign people and companys that would buy land here compared to Thai people and companys looking to buy in the U.K.

COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH,NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPERS ITS ABOUT HAVING A HOUSE THAT BELONGS TO YOU WITH OUT LOSING IT IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG WITH YOUR RELATIONSHIP IN LAW NOT SPECULATING AND DEVELOPING LAND FOR PROFIT

Well Einstein, Has it ever crossed your mind that if you are allowed to buy land it will still affect prices. Not to mention any easing of the laws will make it easier for development companies, for example, a Thai development company would now be able to sell plots of land to foreigner’s possibly all over the world. That will affect prices which may become too high for local buyers. I would agree with thai_narak solution.

ET, Why is it you always have some evil conspiracy theory. The ownership laws are protecting the poor people from the future. Yes, people who own land would get rich but people who cant afford yet, i.e. young people, might never be able to afford again in their lives.

[madjbs]

Protecting poor people from very high prices that they will never be able to afford. While you might be right that in the very very long term it would be beneficial it certainly is going to cause allot of problems in the meantime. Probably better to wait until the rest of the economy is at a stronger level first. If you need evidence there is plenty of places around the world where local buyers have been driven out. Hawaii is one.

[solo siam]

ET, Why is it you always have some evil conspiracy theory. The ownership laws are protecting the poor people from the future

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's economic fact.

Protecting the poor people from what exactly? Evil foreigners?

Protecting the poor people from selling their land to others and enriching themselves that's what.

I don't hear those Thais that sold previously worthless land complaining about their windfall!

You have to ask yourself who stands to gain from not allowing foreigners to buy land. Certainly not the poor. They are poor and will remain so. The only thing they have is their land which remains worthless and used as a bartering chip until it is taken away from them by the lenders.

The hypocrisy is stunning from Thailand's biggest landowners and lenders.

Remember, some are more sufficient than others.

Surely the biggest landowners have the most to GAIN from allowing foreigners to buy, they can sell their land quicker and for more money.

Foreigners do not want poor people's land, which consist mainly of rice paddies in the middle of nowhere.

[esbobes]

I personally think freehold land should be only for the Thais and people with citizenship.

You can argue that they could make citizenship easier, ie for spouses, people with sought after skills etc....

But why should i be able to get off the plane and be able to own land in Thailand?

You can argue the case for companies owning factories, hotels etc... as this is creating wealth for Thailand.

I agree but lets take it a step frather. In Europe, Uk , and the USA no farangs should be allow to own land only Thai's

[hans1977]

I believe most foreigners are here on temporary basis (in legal terms), those who genuinely lives here are the ones to fight for their rights. They have got some rights already, but they have not got equal rights to Thai people; that's where to start, i think.

On the other hand i think the whole situation would ease up quite a bit if the tourists and "sort of tourists" would mind to see the consequences of their behaviour and actually give a chance to see what respect would do to improve the situation.

/Hans

I admire those who try to make a stand, but the fact of the matter is that we have zero rights, never will and all lobbying will do is further piss off those at the top.

[ronigere]

And if they did, so what? There is very few Thais that would buy land in the U.K. Even if they did it wouldnt effect prices much. On the other hand if anyone was allowed to buy here then its possible that in some areas that local people would be driven out due to higher prices. There is far more foreign people and companys that would buy land here compared to Thai people and companys looking to buy in the U.K.

FACT.... THERE ARE MORE THAIS LIVING IN THE UK THAN THERE ARE BRITS LIVING IN THAILAND.NOT TOURISTS BUT LIVING.MANY OF THE THAIS ARE ON DUAL PASSPORTS,MANY ARE MARRIED MANY ARE ILLEGAL.AND WILL INHERIT THERE PROPERTIES WHEN THERE PARTNER DIES THERE THOUSANDS OF THAIS WHO OWN THERE OWN HOUSES AND LAND IN THE UK

FACT ASK THASKIN SHINWATTRA. BUT NOT BRITS IN THAILAND.RECIPROCATE WHATS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE .CHECK WITH BRITISH EMBASSY

[samran]

Mod comment: just a note, off topic and abusive posts have been deleted.

Personal comment: this thread just goes to show why no non-chamber of commerce lobby group has ever gotten off the ground. If you can't even agree online, how are you going to do it in real life?

Another observation: A few people in the past have tried to set these things up in the past. Invariably, the first meeting takes place at the Subway sandwich shop down by Nana. I have never figured out why, but it always seems to be the case (another group used the Bourbon bar and grill as their launch venue).

An association formed at a Sandwhich shop or bar, full of middling calibre members, is never going to get an appointment with the Minister of Commerce, nor likely to have enough funds undertake a campaign to convince the average Thai that foreign ownership isn't such a bad thing.

[madjbs]

There is 17000 Thais in the U.K and there is 41000 Brits living in Thailand, You should check your facts before posting.

[kangeroo]

If the exchange rate for the pound was lower and there were no thai women to buy there would be no poms in thailand.

[kangeroo]

But dont get me wrong i love the brits ...............

[think_too_mut]

If the exchange rate for the pound was lower and there were no thai women to buy there would be no poms in thailand.

Would there be many Aussies in Thailand then? Oz has tropical beaches and all the beauty of the nature.

[kangeroo]

Yes think too mut. same for aus , german dutch or any other nationality you want to throw on the table.

[mrbojangles]

Best thing to do is to lobby for reciprocation of similar laws in our own countries. Unfortunately we would lower ourselves to their level in doing this.

I concur

I am making a killing in the UK housing market at the moment and will re-invest later this year and hopefully continue the trend.

Ditto I've bought 2 in the last 3 months and still just about covering the mortgages with the rental incomes. Of course the real money is in the increase of the property, which is still going up, despite a quiet time at the moment.

The UK is a small island, with nowhere near as much land as Thailand has and it still flourishes. Thaksin has made a mint on his properties in the UK, maybe he should be sending the message back to economists in Thailand, that it isn't such a bad thing.

[think_too_mut]

Yes think too mut. same for aus , german dutch or any other nationality you want to throw on the table.

Australia is a country of and for immigrants. Thailand is not.

I could live in Thailand but always eying Oz: the place of known language, known laws, good schools, a robust democracy, where I can own whatever I can afford, in my name.

And the prices in tropical areas are either same or lower than in Thai.

[mauiguy90]

I admire those who try to make a stand, but the fact of the matter is that we have zero rights, never will and all lobbying will do is further piss off those at the top.

I fully agree with the above statements. Some people are under the mistaken idea that this country is a democracy, as Australia, England, New Zealand, the U.S. and other democratic countries.

We are openly welcome because of the money we bring to the country. Don't ever mistake that for civil rights! If we do not bring money into the country, we are not welcome. We, as foreigners, have no rights here! Just look at how immigrants from neighboring countries are treated. They are treated as dirt and if we as foreigners, bring no money into the country, we would be treated the same.

Edited October 16, 2007 by mauiguy90

[think_too_mut]

We are openly welcome because of the money we bring to the country.

Really? To which country, Thailand?

[cdnvic]

An association formed at a Sandwhich shop or bar, full of middling calibre members, is never going to get an appointment with the Minister of Commerce, nor likely to have enough funds undertake a campaign to convince the average Thai that foreign ownership isn't such a bad thing.

This one can't even make a decent website. I'm thinking that the website is all it is. One of those nice ideas in theory that went nowhere.

[sriracha john]

An association formed at a Sandwhich shop or bar, full of middling calibre members, is never going to get an appointment with the Minister of Commerce, nor likely to have enough funds undertake a campaign to convince the average Thai that foreign ownership isn't such a bad thing.

This one can't even make a decent website. I'm thinking that the website is all it is. One of those nice ideas in theory that went nowhere.

Its numbers indicate a huge and active membership...

Welcome to the TOP 10 page for AOFT.org!

10 most read stories

· 1: UPDATE - No More Dependent Extension Of Stay - (7 reads)

· 2: Nationality Act - (4 reads)

· 3: Announcements - (4 reads)

· 4: New Forum Affiliation - (3 reads)

· 5: Internet failure a "technological tsunami" - (3 reads)

· 6: Misc. Thai Info - (2 reads)

· 7: News - (2 reads)

· 8: Thai embassy in Cambodia ordered to tighten visa screening - (1 reads)

· 9: Thailand Cancels Visa Formalities for Russians - (1 reads)

· 10: Talk Thailand - (1 reads)

10 most voted polls

· 1: What do you think about this site? - (6 votes)

but I did notice that in their newer format, they've removed the multiple plugs seeking donations their site used to contain... perhaps they had some problems with the Canadian authorities over that.

Edited October 16, 2007 by sriracha john

[cdnvic]

So we have a website that almost works and barely get's read, hosted in Canada, registered to a Canadian who doesn't live in Thailand. Tell me again how they are lobbying for farang rights? Or maybe we should just call a spade a spade and say that this is one of those pretend organizations that don't really do anything.