Europeans With Thai Citizenship

[jts-khorat]

People from the US and Europe and China could buy all of Thailand, driving up prices for Thai people so that they could not afford to purchase land in their own country.

That's the shortsighted BS argument the Thais will tell you, and it shows that you do not have it thought through at all.

Proof: tell me a single Thai national you know #personally# that would be able to buy one Rai of beachfront land here in Phuket (which is by now mainly owned by multinational groups, not much different from innercity land in Germany and other developed places).

You name one such Thai person to me I will be shamed, but I bet the odds are for me.

Well, heck, I hang my head in shame now!

It seems a lot of people here on ThaiVisa fly in much higher circles than me, at least.

Alas, as we have proven this way that it seems an easy and affordable thing to buy land at such prices for Thai nationals, then I really do not see the problem that foreigners might chip in as well, as it hardly can inflate prices more than they are right now here on Phuket.

For lopburi: if multinationals can buy up land at will, I even less get the point how private (foreign) persons buying up land will inflate prices beyond levels as they are right now. So which point has been proven here, your answer was rather sparse.

I am sure there are better ways to prevent runaway real estate speculation than to prohibit buying land under any circumstances.

[samran]

People from the US and Europe and China could buy all of Thailand, driving up prices for Thai people so that they could not afford to purchase land in their own country.

That's the shortsighted BS argument the Thais will tell you, and it shows that you do not have it thought through at all.

Proof: tell me a single Thai national you know #personally# that would be able to buy one Rai of beachfront land here in Phuket (which is by now mainly owned by multinational groups, not much different from innercity land in Germany and other developed places).

You name one such Thai person to me I will be shamed, but I bet the odds are for me.

um, I could name a couple who do own beach front on Patong and have a hotel on it. Substantially more than one rai as well. Know them personally, good family friends, etc etc..I have an ongoing offer for free accomadation at this hotel. They have been trading up for a number of years on Patong, but always along the beach front.

And I have met the owners of the Cabana hotel on Patong a number of times.

[jts-khorat]

samran, thank you, I got the point by now (see post one above yours). Still ashamed, I am, and obviously mixing with the wrong crowd

As you and a rather large number of posters have pointed out, Thai people seemingly do not think beachfront land in Patong outrageously expensive, but rather affordable.

This can only mean that I was thinking completely wrong; could you then maybe be so kind to explain to me what Thai people are #really# worrying about if they think those land values okay, it is also okay to sell it to multinationals, but not to Mr Average Farang Joe.

My first guess would be, it must be pure xenophobia and racism then -- but again surely I am wrong, as we have the 21st century and I am sure Thais and Thailand are #much more# enlightened then that...?!

[samran]

samran, thank you, I got the point by now (see post one above yours). Still ashamed, I am, and obviously mixing with the wrong crowd

As you and a rather large number of posters have pointed out, Thai people seemingly do not think beachfront land in Patong outrageously expensive, but rather affordable.

This can only mean that I was thinking completely wrong; could you then maybe be so kind to explain to me what Thai people are #really# worrying about if they think those land values okay, it is also okay to sell it to multinationals, but not to Mr Average Farang Joe.

My first guess would be, it must be pure xenophobia and racism then -- but again surely I am wrong, as we have the 21st century and I am sure Thais and Thailand are #much more# enlightened then that...?!

The people who are selling it to the multi nationals don't have a problem with it. Neither, I suspect, do most educated Thai's. Afterall, they have the land to sell, and would prefer that there be the widest possible source of bidders.

The problem however is that the average Thai (in my expereince) has the sense that the second you sell the land to a foreigner, you are selling the country. There is almost the perception that a foreigner will put a brick wall around the land and not let anyone in, or, that they will take it back to farang land with them.

I wouldn't call it racism though. Most countries have this problem where most people are uneasy about foreign ownership of land and assets, as if there is some devious intent behind it. Australia for instance has what is called the Foreign investment review board, which started out as a 'safeguard' against all things un-Australian. But today, it is pretty much a formality (more or less) for a foreigner to get approval to buy in Australia. But it has taken Australia at least 3 decades to get to the point where it is relatively comfortable with the idea - and even then people aren't always convinced of the merits.

[jstumbo]

Alas, as we have proven this way that it seems an easy and affordable thing to buy land at such prices for Thai nationals, then I really do not see the problem that foreigners might chip in as well, as it hardly can inflate prices more than they are right now here on Phuket.

I remember about 20 years ago when I lived in Washington State in the US, we had many people moving to Washington from California. Home prices were much higher in California, so people would sell their homes and move to Washington. Housing prices went up a lot because of this. All that money coming in, and people from California coming in and paying more than what a normal person in Washington would pay because they considered it "cheap".

Supply and demand. If there are people wanting to buy, and they can afford more than the local population, they will be buying the property. Why sell for a lower price to a local when you can make more selling it to a foreigner?

[jts-khorat]

The people who are selling it to the multi nationals don't have a problem with it. Neither, I suspect, do most educated Thai's. Afterall, they have the land to sell, and would prefer that there be the widest possible source of bidders.

The problem however is that the average Thai (in my expereince) has the sense that the second you sell the land to a foreigner, you are selling the country. There is almost the perception that a foreigner will put a brick wall around the land and not let anyone in, or, that they will take it back to farang land with them.

'most educated Thais'... in a democracy, those would be the people most likely influencing content of laws and political direction. This whole thread is about the fact that absolutely the opposite is fact in Thailand, so I cannot give your argument very much weight.

To recapitulate what we learned (sorry Samran, your often so concise and good argumentation was not really up to your standards this time, so I allow myself to make a little bit of fun of it):

- Thais can afford beachfront land in Phuket and do not think its value outrageous

- selling Thai land to a multinational conglomerate who is much more difficult to disown than a private person building a homestead for his family is preferrable

- the educated Thais would prefer to sell to foreigners -- anybody really -- if they can make even bigger bucks than to sell to their own countrymen only

- the average (which seemingly implies 'uneducated') Thai thinks foreigners are here to steal their heritage from them (as if MTV and television have not already completed that job just nicely)

- Thais are not putting walls around their properties to shut out nosy neighbors or other uninvited people, only those pesky foreigners affront their Thai neighbors with such. Have those foreigners really no shame at all??!

Seems really hard to swallow :-)

In the end I go with xenophobia, racism and the fact that Thais still steal much easier from other Thais ('the educated from the uneducated' in this case, or make that better 'the rich from the poor', or even more controversial but maybe better 'the Thai-Chinese from the Thais').

Better not mix in some foreigners who know the law and their rights (and might wake up the stupid peasants to the BIG world outside), when a pseudo-feudal sytem right out of the middle ages riddled with corruption makes so much more money for the top of the pyramid!

[samran]

To recapitulate what we learned (sorry Samran, your often so concise and good argumentation was not really up to your standards this time, so I allow myself to make a little bit of fun of it):

I didn't say it was a good argument, nor did I say it had to make sense. None of it does. But try working for the Thai governemnt for a couple of years, and see if you don't come to the same conclusions I did. The Thai 'elite' whatever that exactly means, for the most part couldn't give a rats arse one way or another about foreign ownership, unless of course they happen to be in the hypermart business and are losing out to Tesco Lotus and Careefore. Most privately would encourage it, hence the stupid nominee rules that exist. Foregin ownership and control happens in practice though not in name. Any politician who proposed too much foreign ownership would be out on his arse before he could finish his sentence.

You seem to forget one of the things that broke the camels back about Thaksin was his sale of Shincorp to Singaporeans. That was the dumbest move he made, and made him quite unpopular, especially given that he had made his name from bagging the United Nations (the UN isn't my father) and the IMF post 1997. He was playing to his contituency early on, but his own profit motives got in the way of his so-called sense of nationalism.

[jts-khorat]

He was playing to his contituency early on, but his own profit motives got in the way of his so-called sense of nationalism.

Re: Thaksin;

He is sitting safe and warm in HK and I think one could not have pulled it off more clever than he did.

My hat is off to him! Stealing not only obviously and blatantly, but everybody (or at least the masses) cheering him on while he was stuffing his pockets left, right and center.

And then finally shuffling the biggest part of the loot outside of the country so nobody of his jealous competitors will ever be able to get to it; and I do not think the last chapter has been written if he would want to come back and steal some more just out of pure greed, if I look at the result of the last elections. His old power base will vote for him the same as before, if he showers a few presents over them and makes a few sweet just-to-good-to-be-true promises. Thaksin looks decidedly a saint compared to the faces the Thais have to endure now in the news (even though they voted for them too! Incedible!).

And in the next round, I am sure this person in high (advising?) places who is rumoured to have plotted for his downfall will get a nice present just to his liking, as we all know Thais do rather like compromise and agreement than conflict; if the cake is just big enough to be split of course, maybe I am underestimating general appetite.

Timing for a second round: as biology and age take their natural course, I am sure that opportunities for new allegiances are much easier to imagine. One would say, reading the newspapers, that time is passing conveniently fast for Thaksin at least.

His frozen assets in-country: pocket-change and the "price of doing business here". Keeps the tails of the dogs following his trail wagging and the right people will get very rich and forgetful on this money, leftovers as they might be to him...

[jts-khorat]

I didn't say it was a good argument, nor did I say it had to make sense. None of it does. But try working for the Thai governemnt for a couple of years, and see if you don't come to the same conclusions I did. The Thai 'elite' whatever that exactly means, for the most part couldn't give a rats arse one way or another about foreign ownership, unless of course they happen to be in the hypermart business and are losing out to Tesco Lotus and Careefore. Most privately would encourage it, hence the stupid nominee rules that exist. Foregin ownership and control happens in practice though not in name. Any politician who proposed too much foreign ownership would be out on his arse before he could finish his sentence.

Re: Samran in general, I confess I was trolling a little bit just for the fun of it;

It still makes me often incredible sad that the Thai people seem unable to look through the most obvious populist political positions, and I wonder if they even understand the concept of politics or care at all. Hence I go quite often from blackest cynism about this country to just believing, that maybe I am completely wrong myself and the Thais do actually want and prefer the system as it is. Maybe it is right after all that the Thais should learn from their own mistakes, and get to a more enlightened society alone by their own blood and sweat.

I myself see the obvious benefits of a country corrupt to the core, whenever I can bribe myself out of a small traffic violation or squeeze myself into a spot where I actually rightfully would not belong into. Than there is my other side who just screams: this is wrong, wrong, wrong.

In the end, being racist and backwards does however not befit the Thais at all, especially in light of their religious belief system.

[chatette]

Back to the original OP, I'm Thai and European and know many others like me. And, contrary to one poster above, I didn't have to change my name. Of course, since I'm not Asian, it's rather moot until I show my ID or passport: my Thainess isn't engraved on my forehead, so it's assumed I'm 'just' another farang in sweat land. But if the point of the OP is to show disparity in Thais holding European citizenship to Europeans holding Thai, that will surely be held up. Invariably the economics will prevail: citizenship of a so-called developed country is invariably more valuable that that of one that is perpetually developing (the state of pavements is a good measure). I am a Thai citizen of convenience, not of need. I can choose where I want to live, whether it's New York, Bangkok, Brussels, Tokyo, Beijing or Sydney, in no particular order. Thais with only one nationality who are not wealthy, and that is most, ordinarily can not.

[LivinLOS]

But if the point of the OP is to show disparity in Thais holding European citizenship to Europeans holding Thai, that will surely be held up. Invariably the economics will prevail: citizenship of a so-called developed country is invariably more valuable that that of one that is perpetually developing (the state of pavements is a good measure).

But does that not beg the question.. Why do we make it so much easier for Thais to become citizens of 'our' countries, then they make it to become citizens of theirs.. There lies the percieved injustice..

Not only is western citizenship more 'valuable' we make it easier to obtain also..

[Heng]

It's because someone always forgets to close the windows, front/back and sliding doors to the house.

[samran]

But if the point of the OP is to show disparity in Thais holding European citizenship to Europeans holding Thai, that will surely be held up. Invariably the economics will prevail: citizenship of a so-called developed country is invariably more valuable that that of one that is perpetually developing (the state of pavements is a good measure).

But does that not beg the question.. Why do we make it so much easier for Thais to become citizens of 'our' countries, then they make it to become citizens of theirs.. There lies the percieved injustice..

Not only is western citizenship more 'valuable' we make it easier to obtain also..

To be honest, I don't think the process is partucularly 'hard'. Bureacratic definetly there is a lot of running around to do. But hard...no. The fact that the path to citizenship isn't well advertised probably adds to the perception of opaqueness.

I'd like to hear what you think is hard about it. I know that retirees aren't given access for instance.

But that is not unusual. Australia follows one model where retirees aren't given a path to citizenship, nor are many temporary workers - unless they apply for PR first, which can be a challenge in itself if you are too old or don't have the right skill set.

Britain on the other hand follows another model, where in most cases 5 years in the UK usually qualifies you for citizenship.

The only think I'd like to see is a more equitable access for foreign males married to Thai's. That is for sure, but that is the only 'real' problem. But, even so, if you are married and working then the path is easier (first to PR) and cheaper.

The other -really really- good thing about the Thai citizenship system, is that once obtained it can be passed on indefinetly, no matter where one is born. The only qualification is that the parent was a Thai national. Compare this to many other places, where after 2 generations born overseas, all links to the 'home' country are generally lost.

[LivinLOS]

PR and citizenship... Hard being.. Not available to ANYONE (male) except those working in high paying jobs inside Thailand.

No overseas employment accepted (all the oil workers).. No retirement.. No marriage.. No study.. No supporting child.. No etc etc etc.. Only those with a nice high level of Thai tax payments need apply.

I could also point out that under 50's retirees dont even have a visa class available to even start on the PR ladder let along have a chance at even being denied !!!

Compared to Thais in Europe who can (once visa is initially given) come, stay and work (same min income levels), and pretty much auto qualify after a mere 5 years. In the mean time they can own what they like, run businesses with equal rules and rights, basically a level legal playing field.

so yes I see that as being infinitely more transparent, fair, clear, and easier.

[Heng]

The other -really really- good thing about the Thai citizenship system, is that once obtained it can be passed on indefinetly, no matter where one is born. The only qualification is that the parent was a Thai national. Compare this to many other places, where after 2 generations born overseas, all links to the 'home' country are generally lost.

That is rather convenient. My grandchildren, unless we decide to spend considerable time stateside will have to deal with all the inconveniences of having only one passport. Will have to work on the solution to that sometime between now and 20-25 years from now.

[samran]

PR and citizenship... Hard being.. Not available to ANYONE (male) except those working in high paying jobs inside Thailand.

your proof is where that you need to have a high paying job??? Requirement is three years tax returns. I know some people who have pretty humble jobs with PR.

No overseas employment accepted (all the oil workers).. No retirement.. No marriage.. No study.. No supporting child.. No etc etc etc.. Only those with a nice high level of Thai tax payments need apply.

why should people living offshore, not paying taxes, etc, be eligible for Thai citizenship??? Becoming a citizen - anywhere -is about contributing to a country through spending time, working and yes, paying taxes. I'm not a believer in handing citizenship out to people who simple hang around long enough.

As for retirees, well I've mentioned that it is not unusual for retirees to be not offered a path to citizenship. Study - if it is a proper university degree at an acreditied Thai univeristy I would agree that there should be a route - maybe as an extra couple of points to PR.

Two years a 'Baan Phasaa Thai' though doesn't cut it in my book.

Supporting child and spouses - definetly should. I've already said this is a massive weak spot.

Compared to Thais in Europe who can (once visa is initially given) come, stay and work (same min income levels), and pretty much auto qualify after a mere 5 years. In the mean time they can own what they like, run businesses with equal rules and rights, basically a level legal playing field.

you are talking about migrating with a family member - which yes is easier. But getting rights to work in an EU country as a non-EU national is very diffiucult. Getting a work permit in Thailand is easier than getting one in Euroland for a non-euro citizen.

Minimum income levels? I don't understand what you mean. Foreigners who work in Thailand tend to be paid much much more than the average Thai! Even the humble English teacher usually earns more than the average Thai would.

The whole issue of work permits is over-emphasised. I'd bet that if you got rid of the need for work permits for spouses of Thai citizens, that you'll still have families struggling. A combination of the typical farang husband not having the right skills to offer the local job market, not being able to speak the language, and not being able to cope economically in a country where you can't usually earn as much as back home.

so yes I see that as being infinitely more transparent, fair, clear, and easier.

More common yes in the west, but I if you speak to PR holders here, the application process isn't rocket science .

[LivinLOS]

your proof is where that you need to have a high paying job??? Requirement is three years tax returns. I know some people who have pretty humble jobs with PR.

I had read (on here) that PR applications were looked at most unfavourably at earnings of less than 80k per month.. That may or may not be fcorrect, apologies if not but that is what I read here.

No overseas employment accepted (all the oil workers).. No retirement.. No marriage.. No study.. No supporting child.. No etc etc etc.. Only those with a nice high level of Thai tax payments need apply.

why should people living offshore, not paying taxes, etc, be eligible for Thai citizenship??? Becoming a citizen - anywhere -is about contributing to a country through spending time, working and yes, paying taxes. I'm not a believer in handing citizenship out to people who simple hang around long enough.

Well here is exactly the difference between Euro style immigration and here.. Thats why I said it is easier there. Does that not seem obvious ??

Secondly I know many oil guys, who live here (not 'live offshore'), who would pay some taxes, who would create a base here, but would like some basic things like perhaps a visa to stay here. I dont see why there is no way to legalize these guys who have houses here, spend all thier non working time here, and do put money into the system but are precluded from gaining a formal legal base here.

I also think the Thai system is equally daft about the same issues for teleworkers and remote work.. They could have a nice revenue stream and tax payments from these people but instead they make it very tough to legalize.

Compared to Thais in Europe who can (once visa is initially given) come, stay and work (same min income levels), and pretty much auto qualify after a mere 5 years. In the mean time they can own what they like, run businesses with equal rules and rights, basically a level legal playing field.

you are talking about migrating with a family member - which yes is easier. But getting rights to work in an EU country as a non-EU national is very diffiucult. Getting a work permit in Thailand is easier than getting one in Euroland for a non-euro citizen.

Well we will have to agree to dissagree.. I knew many Thais back in the west and they all had easy and legal work permits and rights.. My wife back then had her Austrian citizenship, and could work all over Europe easily. Only had taken her a few years and was easy and transparent to obtain.

Minimum income levels? I don't understand what you mean. Foreigners who work in Thailand tend to be paid much much more than the average Thai! Even the humble English teacher usually earns more than the average Thai would.

Farang min wages to extend in country are what 55k ?? And average Thais earn and pay taxes on ??

Level playing fields.. thats kind of my point here..

The whole issue of work permits is over-emphasised. I'd bet that if you got rid of the need for work permits for spouses of Thai citizens, that you'll still have families struggling. A combination of the typical farang husband not having the right skills to offer the local job market, not being able to speak the language, and not being able to cope economically in a country where you can't usually earn as much as back home.

Strongly dissagree within the tourist markets that I have experience of..

The farang businesses I see are on average better customer serviced, better managed, more efficient.. But running a business as a farang is a constant drain of higher taxes, dead weight in thai partners, staff you may not need, accounting hassles that thais dont do, additional fees and tea money thats not applied to thais. Even with a playing field thats radically tilted in Thai businesses favor the farang businesses I see still manage to out compete them. Thats property companys, marina and sailing industry, hospitality industry, hotels and guesthouses, even bar and restaurants, which lets face it is very much lowest common denominator.

Much of this is of course knowing the mindset of the (farang) customer.. There less mai pen rai about important things like room booking systems etc etc etc.. I will readily conceed that this advantage may well evaporate once you get out in the sticks or apply these things to nakhon nowhere.. But I think much of Thailands laws and rules are about an unfair hobbling of non thai businesses by saddling them with costs and rules that thais would never have applied.

I dont want the above to sound like sour grapes.. It is what it is and I am fully aware of it and still here.. But I dont think you can compare the two and not find the systems in favor of a Thai in Europe for 'ease' than a farang in Thailand.. Even my Thai wife used to get all worked into a hissy about these exact issues after she had lived in Europe for some years and then returned.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Back to the original OP, I'm Thai and European and know many others like me. And, contrary to one poster above, I didn't have to change my name. Of course, since I'm not Asian, it's rather moot until I show my ID or passport: my Thainess isn't engraved on my forehead, so it's assumed I'm 'just' another farang in sweat land. But if the point of the OP is to show disparity in Thais holding European citizenship to Europeans holding Thai, that will surely be held up. Invariably the economics will prevail: citizenship of a so-called developed country is invariably more valuable that that of one that is perpetually developing (the state of pavements is a good measure). I am a Thai citizen of convenience, not of need. I can choose where I want to live, whether it's New York, Bangkok, Brussels, Tokyo, Beijing or Sydney, in no particular order. Thais with only one nationality who are not wealthy, and that is most, ordinarily can not.

ain't that the truth.