Setting Up Company To Buy House

[samran]

Hi,

Wifey and I have been looking at places of late, and have run across a few houses/town houses that are owned by foreigners via the company route.

Not that I need a company to purchase land (Thai PP and all), but it struck me that the sellers would probably be wanting to recoup the costs of setting up the company, especially if it is substantial, and include it in the selling price.

Does anyone know then how much your typical lawyer would charge to set up a company, and if there are any running costs in a typical company etc etc.

[Makyai]

Hi Samran,

We used Sunbelt to setup our company (May 07) whilst we were still in Australia and the bill came to approx 40,000baht. This was for a fully operational company with Work Permit, courier fees to Australia etc. I would think that if you have an address that you could use for the company and don't need the work permit then the fees would be around 30,000baht.

There is ongoing accounting stuff - VAT, withholding tax and personal income tax lodgment with the revenue department that we have to take care of every month. Don't know if this will apply to you though.

Hope this helps.

Makyai

Edited January 12, 2008 by Makyai

[eljeque]

Wifey and I have been looking at places of late, and have run across a few houses/town houses that are owned by foreigners via the company route.

Not that I need a company to purchase land (Thai PP and all), but it struck me that the sellers would probably be wanting to recoup the costs of setting up the company, especially if it is substantial, and include it in the selling price.

Nope. They are selling shares of the company to you, and the price they are asking for the "property" is really the price of the company shares that will be transferred to you.

Make sure that they have the ID card copies and share sale paperwork for all of the other shareholders as well.

Does anyone know then how much your typical lawyer would charge to set up a company, and if there are any running costs in a typical company etc etc.

Accountants do the work. You will not need a lawyer. Lawyers simply charge a commission and send it to an accountant to do the work.

Make sure that all of the balance sheets are up to date and that the taxes have been paid for last year and the years before. Your accountant can will make sure of this prior to the transfer of shares.

It costs about 11,000 / year for taxes and accountant fees.

PM me, and I would be happy to recommend my accountant, with whom many friends and I have been working for 18 years.

There is a lot of property out there which can now be had well below "market" value. Be shrewd and cold about buying and you can get a great deal. Look around a lot on your own, not just with agents.

[Makyai]

Hi

Just wanted to add that we didn't set up a company to buy a house or property. So my experience is only with setting up a company for business purposes. I am a Thai national and buying property is not an issue for me.

[backflip]

I too used Sunbelt, and the cost was about 40K THB. The company was set up with two classes of stock, to prevent the Thai shareholders from gaining control of the company. I set up the company to buy a townhouse, but I purchased a condo instead. If you're interested, you can buy my company - I'm sure that Sunbelt can arrange to change the name of the Managing Director from me to "you". PM me if you are interested.

[ade100]

We are using a local accountancy company to set up our company on Phuket. Cost quoted is 22 KTHB. How good the service will be, I don't know yet.

[12DrinkMore]

If you have a Thai PP, then surely all you need to do is to buy the property from the company? Then there will be no issues about the company for you at all. It will be the responsibility of the directors to close it down and sort out the potential mess...

[samran]

If you have a Thai PP, then surely all you need to do is to buy the property from the company? Then there will be no issues about the company for you at all. It will be the responsibility of the directors to close it down and sort out the potential mess...

that was my theory of course. Just wanted to make sure that there wasn't any costs being passed on to me uncessearily.

[WilliamJarvis]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

Edited January 24, 2008 by WilliamJarvis

[moldy]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

I brought by company 5 years ago- cost 25,000 set up in Bangkok. I have to pay 10k or so accountancy fees every year.

If you are in a stable relationship, by far the best way is to buy in wifey's name and lease back to you for 30 years x 2.

I'm embroiled in a bitter dispute over the property I brought. I don't think I will lose, but I wouldn't go the company route again. Utter crap about if being failsafe, I'd say 98% but that really isn't good enough is it? you have to be 100% where proerty is concerned.

[sweetchariot]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

I brought by company 5 years ago- cost 25,000 set up in Bangkok. I have to pay 10k or so accountancy fees every year.

If you are in a stable relationship, by far the best way is to buy in wifey's name and lease back to you for 30 years x 2.

I'm embroiled in a bitter dispute over the property I brought. I don't think I will lose, but I wouldn't go the company route again. Utter crap about if being failsafe, I'd say 98% but that really isn't good enough is it? you have to be 100% where proerty is concerned.

I would also wait and see how the FBA mutates under Toxins new chronies. I can see alot of people thinking they bought legitamately having some serious problems with their 'companies' in the next few years.

As above I would recommend the wife/ partner route, but with a 3 x 30 yrs lease.

Maybe Sunbelt can offer some advice? They are a regular visitor to this forum, but today is Sunday.

[moldy]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

I brought by company 5 years ago- cost 25,000 set up in Bangkok. I have to pay 10k or so accountancy fees every year.

If you are in a stable relationship, by far the best way is to buy in wifey's name and lease back to you for 30 years x 2.

I'm embroiled in a bitter dispute over the property I brought. I don't think I will lose, but I wouldn't go the company route again. Utter crap about if being failsafe, I'd say 98% but that really isn't good enough is it? you have to be 100% where proerty is concerned.

I would also wait and see how the FBA mutates under Toxins new chronies. I can see alot of people thinking they bought legitamately having some serious problems with their 'companies' in the next few years.

As above I would recommend the wife/ partner route, but with a 3 x 30 yrs lease.

Maybe Sunbelt can offer some advice? They are a regular visitor to this forum, but today is Sunday.

I didn't realise you can get 3x30.

Yes, the FBA is another factor. I think it's more a worry in the back of your mind really rather than anything that seems to happen. But it does illustrate that you're not on solid ground where buying through a company is concerned- there is the tiny potential for the whole thing to be voided.

When a propery goes in to a Thai name, that's that !!!!!!!!. Anybody tries to change that will get laughed out of court.

Maybe, that's the same with an MD's signature on the sheet too, but that might not stop some dumb ass taking a shot, and even if there is no case you can end up in a long drawn out court case at eventual cost to the loser (which probably won't be you) but no guarantee of seeing that money come back.

I speak from experience.

[moldy]

what does it tell your wife too? you know!!

[sweetchariot]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

I brought by company 5 years ago- cost 25,000 set up in Bangkok. I have to pay 10k or so accountancy fees every year.

If you are in a stable relationship, by far the best way is to buy in wifey's name and lease back to you for 30 years x 2.

I'm embroiled in a bitter dispute over the property I brought. I don't think I will lose, but I wouldn't go the company route again. Utter crap about if being failsafe, I'd say 98% but that really isn't good enough is it? you have to be 100% where proerty is concerned.

I would also wait and see how the FBA mutates under Toxins new chronies. I can see alot of people thinking they bought legitamately having some serious problems with their 'companies' in the next few years.

As above I would recommend the wife/ partner route, but with a 3 x 30 yrs lease.

Maybe Sunbelt can offer some advice? They are a regular visitor to this forum, but today is Sunday.

I didn't realise you can get 3x30.

Yes, the FBA is another factor. I think it's more a worry in the back of your mind really rather than anything that seems to happen. But it does illustrate that you're not on solid ground where buying through a company is concerned- there is the tiny potential for the whole thing to be voided.

I speak from experience.

I will remind you of that in approx 2 years, when you are having to restructure.

[moldy]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

I brought by company 5 years ago- cost 25,000 set up in Bangkok. I have to pay 10k or so accountancy fees every year.

If you are in a stable relationship, by far the best way is to buy in wifey's name and lease back to you for 30 years x 2.

I'm embroiled in a bitter dispute over the property I brought. I don't think I will lose, but I wouldn't go the company route again. Utter crap about if being failsafe, I'd say 98% but that really isn't good enough is it? you have to be 100% where proerty is concerned.

I would also wait and see how the FBA mutates under Toxins new chronies. I can see alot of people thinking they bought legitamately having some serious problems with their 'companies' in the next few years.

As above I would recommend the wife/ partner route, but with a 3 x 30 yrs lease.

Maybe Sunbelt can offer some advice? They are a regular visitor to this forum, but today is Sunday.

I didn't realise you can get 3x30.

Yes, the FBA is another factor. I think it's more a worry in the back of your mind really rather than anything that seems to happen. But it does illustrate that you're not on solid ground where buying through a company is concerned- there is the tiny potential for the whole thing to be voided.

I speak from experience.

I will remind you of that in approx 2 years, when you are having to restructure.

Well hopefully not as I am forcing through a sale followed by a swift closure of the company. And as I've said I'm no fan of the company way.

In all honesty, the restructuring is easy- done it already, any competent solicitor can work it in such a way that the law is satisfied without the MD losing any power whatsoever. No my point is more about the general legality of the whole process full stop. Technically speaking the whole thing could be deemed a circumvention of the law- there is always that possibility no matter how slight. The whole process is complex and confuses everyone, and as I've said is more likely to a Thai in to believing theyn have a right over the property.

Any farang has to come to terms with the fact that he'll never own land in the western sense, nor likely see his money again without significant struggle. It's more about providing for you and your wife in the living years, protecting you if she dies or turns against you, and providing for her and your family when you take the big dirt nap. Surely then the leasehold way is best.

[whatsupdoc]

^the biggest 'cost' to you would be if the company in question had not filed its tax returns correctly and the Revenue Department decided to impose its Draconian penalty fees. Then you may well find you owe the Revenue Department an awful lot more than it cost you to buy the property/company in question

The OP is in the position just to buy the assets (the house), so he doesn't need to buy the company. Buying an existing company is risky anyway; it's hard to know what kind of hidden debts might be involved....