Money Lost On A Deal That Never Was...

[Maigo6]

By the way, Thais <deleted> over Thais also.

Correct.

[roygsd]

very quickly and from memory -

Directors of BOI approved companies can acquire residential land - the BoI Cos themselves can own certain land even if they're foreign owned

Investors who bring THB 40 Mn baht into Thailand can acquire land

Listed synidcated land owning companies are eligible investments by foreigners

I notice that you use "acquire" rather than "own". Just because you buy something doesn't mean you own it. Look up the legal definition of ownership. It has to do with legal use and disposition as and when one sees fit .. in perpetuity

Re: BOI promoted companies don't "own" the land in a permanent legal context. If the company is ever dissolved or loses their promotional privileges they have to sell any real property to a Thai or Thai company.

Investment is not ownership.

Treaty of Amity Companies can own land

I don't think so

Foreigners can have 49% ownership of land owning companies set up in a way that is reliable and robust

49% is not ownership, it's participation in the company. You own shares, not "real property".

The Thai longstay programme provides ownership benefits (wouldn't be my personal favourite)

Doesn't meet the legal definition of "ownership"

My colleagues at Hamptons Mortgages offer lease purchase schemes

Which means?

Foreigners can inherit land

That "inheritance" may actually be a defacto usufruct .. as such, "inheritance" does not entitle you to actual "ownership".

and (somewhat theoretically) you could buy a Thai bank and be entitled to retain any property interests that it has

Are you sure about that .. you don't sound very sure. If a Thai company buys the bank, you are probably correct, but you're back in the "minority position" again. Theory is great in theory, but ..

I'm sure that I've missed one or 2....

And I'm sure that none will pass the test of "legal ownership"

You can of course register a 30 year lease and subject to conditions you may be eligible to extend that in 30 years time for up to a further 30 years

Which has nothing to do with ownership.

What Thai law always comes back to is that one Thai law/regulation/rule/et.al cannot contradict another Thai law. Look up the Alien Property Act.

Good response,

ownership= freehold

excluded from purchasing freehold land = non ownership simply a right of use for a set time.

roy gsd

[roygsd]

By the way, Thais <deleted> over Thais also.

Correct.

its almost standard practice, if the opportunity presents itself.

roy gsd

[Maigo6]

By the way, Thais <deleted> over Thais also.

Correct.

its almost standard practice, if the opportunity presents itself.

roy gsd

So no dfifferent to Farangland then.

[roygsd]

By the way, Thais <deleted> over Thais also.

Correct.

its almost standard practice, if the opportunity presents itself.

roy gsd

So no dfifferent to Farangland then.

Exactly!

roy gsd

[Paul MBMG]

QUOTE (klikster @ 2008-06-23 11:12:31)

QUOTE (Paul MBMG @ 2008-06-22 22:19:12)

very quickly and from memory -

I notice that you use "acquire" rather than "own". Just because you buy something doesn't mean you own it. Look up the legal definition of ownership. It has to do with legal use and disposition as and when one sees fit .. in perpetuity

Re: BOI promoted companies don't "own" the land in a permanent legal context. If the company is ever dissolved or loses their promotional privileges they have to sell any real property to a Thai or Thai company.

Investment is not ownership.

QUOTE

Treaty of Amity Companies can own land

I don't think so

QUOTE

Foreigners can have 49% ownership of land owning companies set up in a way that is reliable and robust

49% is not ownership, it's participation in the company. You own shares, not "real property".

QUOTE

The Thai longstay programme provides ownership benefits (wouldn't be my personal favourite)

Doesn't meet the legal definition of "ownership"

QUOTE

My colleagues at Hamptons Mortgages offer lease purchase schemes

Which means?

QUOTE

Foreigners can inherit land

That "inheritance" may actually be a defacto usufruct .. as such, "inheritance" does not entitle you to actual "ownership".

QUOTE

and (somewhat theoretically) you could buy a Thai bank and be entitled to retain any property interests that it has

Are you sure about that .. you don't sound very sure. If a Thai company buys the bank, you are probably correct, but you're back in the "minority position" again. Theory is great in theory, but ..

QUOTE

I'm sure that I've missed one or 2....

And I'm sure that none will pass the test of "legal ownership"

QUOTE

You can of course register a 30 year lease and subject to conditions you may be eligible to extend that in 30 years time for up to a further 30 years

Which has nothing to do with ownership.

What Thai law always comes back to is that one Thai law/regulation/rule/et.al cannot contradict another Thai law. Look up the Alien Property Act.

Good response,

ownership= freehold

excluded from purchasing freehold land = non ownership simply a right of use for a set time.

roy gsd

This now seems to be becoming more of a philosophical discourse about what is ownership. Every situation is different and yes you have to weigh up issues like

Do I want to 'own' this land in perpetuity or merely have a temporary right to own it and then sell it and receive the proceeds - if the latter then the BoI route may well be fine

Do I want to 'own' subject to restricted covenants? In which case TLP may be the answer

Do I want to be able to assert the economic benefits of ownership? In which case the Thai company route or LeasePurchase

Do I want unrestricted permanent rights of private ownership - in which case the THB 40 Mn scheme may be right for you

I am quite certain about foreigners being able to acquire ownership by buying banks - I said in theory because I don't think too many of us are likely to do that. In reality when foreign banks have bought local banks this right has been activated.

Inheritance isn't necessarily just restrcited to land rights but as planning to inherit land isn't generally a viable strategy for achieveing ownership and as this is a reasonably complex matter then I wouldn't see any point going too far down that road.

ToA companies have certainly been involved as parties in land transactions.

With many land ownership systems, to be honest, acquire may be a more suitable distinction than own anyway. No-one, Thai or Farang, can actually buy land in Thailand (or countries such as the UK) anyway - you can only acquire a freeholder's interest. While you may have freehold title the ultimate ownership of the land never devolves from The State - in many countries that is seen as being a technicality as it is not viewed as a reasonable possibility that say in The UK, the Crown will reclaim the land it owns from the freeholders. In other countries you would have to be more concerned about whether that is a realistic possibility. I don't mean to spoil anyone's fun but to me the philosophical debate about the meaning of ownership is a lot less interesting than what that means in practice to each and every individual 'landowner'. On one level nobody in Thailand is allowed to own land except the State which owns all land here. On another level you can obtain sufficient rights of frehold interest to satisfy what most investors seek to achieve from property.....meanwhile you could of course have a long and interesting philosophical debate about what ownership means. I might not have time to join in but if you do, don't forget about Proudhon!!

[Spiny]

Does anyone know anybody that has lent money to a thai and had it back ?

Yes , I lent 300,000 baht to my driver and he paid it back in 3 months. (Although I did find out later he has been using my personal car for his own business, subject of a previous post " Clocking a Fortuner"

[LivinLOS]

Lets just try these one by one..

Directors of BOI approved companies can acquire residential land - the BoI Cos themselves can own certain land even if they're foreign owned\

I do not think they can own residential land.. They can own land for business purposes ???

Investors who bring THB 40 Mn baht into Thailand can acquire land

I am sure this has ended / Never existed.. I know someone who did the 40 million investment visa and he cannot own land.

Listed synidcated land owning companies are eligible investments by foreigners

As long as its only a minority shareholding so not majority ownership.

Treaty of Amity Companies can own land

No they cant.. One of the Amity restrictions is it cant own land (so I have been told by a person with one and read on here).

Foreigners can have 49% ownership of land owning companies set up in a way that is reliable and robust

By reliable and robust I assume you mean through trickery and deception (putting the land in 100% Thai owned company and changing company ownership).

The Thai longstay programme provides ownership benefits (wouldn't be my personal favourite)

You mean you can give the land to someone else ??

My colleagues at Hamptons Mortgages offer lease purchase schemes

That results in the outright ownership of land ?? I want to hear more.

Foreigners can inherit land

To be given the right to sell it within a short timeframe, your merely the executor.

and (somewhat theoretically) you could buy a Thai bank and be entitled to retain any property interests that it has

I am fairly sure you would have a problem obtaining a majority shareholding of a Thai bank.

I'm sure that I've missed one or 2....

I am waiting for one or two correct ones ??

You can of course register a 30 year lease and subject to conditions you may be eligible to extend that in 30 years time for up to a further 30 years

Lease does not equal own..

[Marvo]

Does anyone know anybody that has lent money to a thai and had it back ?

I lent the GF 20 Baht yesterday and she gave it back to me today

[klikster]

QUOTE (klikster @ 2008-06-23 11:12:31)

QUOTE (Paul MBMG @ 2008-06-22 22:19:12)

very quickly and from memory -

I notice that you use "acquire" rather than "own". Just because you buy something doesn't mean you own it. Look up the legal definition of ownership. It has to do with legal use and disposition as and when one sees fit .. in perpetuity

Re: BOI promoted companies don't "own" the land in a permanent legal context. If the company is ever dissolved or loses their promotional privileges they have to sell any real property to a Thai or Thai company.

Investment is not ownership.

QUOTE

Treaty of Amity Companies can own land

I don't think so

QUOTE

Foreigners can have 49% ownership of land owning companies set up in a way that is reliable and robust

49% is not ownership, it's participation in the company. You own shares, not "real property".

QUOTE

The Thai longstay programme provides ownership benefits (wouldn't be my personal favourite)

Doesn't meet the legal definition of "ownership"

QUOTE

My colleagues at Hamptons Mortgages offer lease purchase schemes

Which means?

QUOTE

Foreigners can inherit land

That "inheritance" may actually be a defacto usufruct .. as such, "inheritance" does not entitle you to actual "ownership".

QUOTE

and (somewhat theoretically) you could buy a Thai bank and be entitled to retain any property interests that it has

Are you sure about that .. you don't sound very sure. If a Thai company buys the bank, you are probably correct, but you're back in the "minority position" again. Theory is great in theory, but ..

QUOTE

I'm sure that I've missed one or 2....

And I'm sure that none will pass the test of "legal ownership"

QUOTE

You can of course register a 30 year lease and subject to conditions you may be eligible to extend that in 30 years time for up to a further 30 years

Which has nothing to do with ownership.

What Thai law always comes back to is that one Thai law/regulation/rule/et.al cannot contradict another Thai law. Look up the Alien Property Act.

Good response,

ownership= freehold

excluded from purchasing freehold land = non ownership simply a right of use for a set time.

roy gsd

This now seems to be becoming more of a philosophical discourse about what is ownership. Every situation is different and yes you have to weigh up issues like

Do I want to 'own' this land in perpetuity or merely have a temporary right to own it and then sell it and receive the proceeds - if the latter then the BoI route may well be fine

Do I want to 'own' subject to restricted covenants? In which case TLP may be the answer

Do I want to be able to assert the economic benefits of ownership? In which case the Thai company route or LeasePurchase

Do I want unrestricted permanent rights of private ownership - in which case the THB 40 Mn scheme may be right for you

I am quite certain about foreigners being able to acquire ownership by buying banks - I said in theory because I don't think too many of us are likely to do that. In reality when foreign banks have bought local banks this right has been activated.

Inheritance isn't necessarily just restrcited to land rights but as planning to inherit land isn't generally a viable strategy for achieveing ownership and as this is a reasonably complex matter then I wouldn't see any point going too far down that road.

ToA companies have certainly been involved as parties in land transactions.

With many land ownership systems, to be honest, acquire may be a more suitable distinction than own anyway. No-one, Thai or Farang, can actually buy land in Thailand (or countries such as the UK) anyway - you can only acquire a freeholder's interest. While you may have freehold title the ultimate ownership of the land never devolves from The State - in many countries that is seen as being a technicality as it is not viewed as a reasonable possibility that say in The UK, the Crown will reclaim the land it owns from the freeholders. In other countries you would have to be more concerned about whether that is a realistic possibility. I don't mean to spoil anyone's fun but to me the philosophical debate about the meaning of ownership is a lot less interesting than what that means in practice to each and every individual 'landowner'. On one level nobody in Thailand is allowed to own land except the State which owns all land here. On another level you can obtain sufficient rights of frehold interest to satisfy what most investors seek to achieve from property.....meanwhile you could of course have a long and interesting philosophical debate about what ownership means. I might not have time to join in but if you do, don't forget about Proudhon!!

You are really dancing around the "ownership" issue and is not philosophical .. it is legal. Yet, much as real estate developers have done, you seem to be subscribing to a special Thai expat definition of "own" rather than an internationally accepted one.

But until you face the reality of what legal ownership means, you are simply talking.

This may not be exact, but it conveys the spirit of "ownership"

PROPERTY. The right and interest which a man has in lands and chattels to the exclusion of others. 6 Binn. 98; 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johns. 283; 14 East, 370; 11 East, 290, 518. It is the right to enjoy and to dispose of certain things in the most absolute manner as he pleases, provided he makes no use of them prohibited by law.

more

"With many land ownership systems, to be honest, acquire may be a more suitable distinction than own anyway."

Since you have made my case, I'll defer to others.

You can buy it, but you can never own it.

[dotcom]

Then you have the tiny lunatic fringe that think they are smarter than everyone else including the Laws of Thailand.

It is their obsession to be the guy that can game the system. So much that even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary will insist they "own" land here.

Trying to talk sense to them is a waste of breath.

[Paul MBMG]

You can buy it, but you can never own it.

Correct klikster - in most countries in the world, Thailand being no different. I agree - mortals cannot own land - almost anywhere, not just Thailand, irrrespective of their nationality. Generally the best that they can aspire to is a freehold interest

Residential land entitlemnt does come with BoI - we have set these up so I can confirm that from experience. Foreigners have bough banks on several occasions in the last few years - you've never heard of ABN, UOB, Standard Chartered, etc etc

owning protected shares in a company that owns freehold is clear enough for many people who understand these things

as for the rest you can't own the plante only take a freehold interest so arguing about the restrictions on that freehold interest as not meeting the legal definition of owning an asset that no-one is entitled to own is just too bizarre for me

I'll carry on spending my days helping people to acquire the levels of interest in property that they personally aspire to and let you chaps discurse as to which definition of legal ownership doesn't apply most to an asset that can only ever be acquired not owned, not just by foreigners in Thailand but by anyone anywhere. Ever wondered why the laws of the land apply in your own bedroom? It's because of the sovereign claim over land by the state - freehold is compromised as are all other legal definitions of land ownership anywhere...but don't let me stop the party, guys

[Maigo6]

Does anyone know anybody that has lent money to a thai and had it back ?

I lent the GF 20 Baht yesterday and she gave it back to me today

Haha.....

According to many on this Forum, that's just the beginning, she is taking the long Scam route, maybe next year she'll ask you for 40 Baht !!!

Who knows where it will go after that. it could even hit 100 Baht or more.

[Maigo6]

[quote name='dotcom' date='

[roygsd]

You can buy it, but you can never own it.

Correct klikster - in most countries in the world, Thailand being no different. I agree - mortals cannot own land - almost anywhere, not just Thailand, irrrespective of their nationality. Generally the best that they can aspire to is a freehold interest

Residential land entitlemnt does come with BoI - we have set these up so I can confirm that from experience. Foreigners have bough banks on several occasions in the last few years - you've never heard of ABN, UOB, Standard Chartered, etc etc

owning protected shares in a company that owns freehold is clear enough for many people who understand these things

as for the rest you can't own the plante only take a freehold interest so arguing about the restrictions on that freehold interest as not meeting the legal definition of owning an asset that no-one is entitled to own is just too bizarre for me

I'll carry on spending my days helping people to acquire the levels of interest in property that they personally aspire to and let you chaps discurse as to which definition of legal ownership doesn't apply most to an asset that can only ever be acquired not owned, not just by foreigners in Thailand but by anyone anywhere. Ever wondered why the laws of the land apply in your own bedroom? It's because of the sovereign claim over land by the state - freehold is compromised as are all other legal definitions of land ownership anywhere...but don't let me stop the party, guys

freehold is freehold

lease is a lease

anything else is a variation of either of the above but does not provide the same level of security as freehold does.

When people are looking to purchase land they want to protect their investment, freehold provides the best security.

Some land agents /brokers/ scammers might like to try to confuse the potential client/mark with wordmanship but most peopleI hope know the diffence between sound advice from impartial sources and sharp markting practices designer to entice someone to conclude their investment is more secure than it actually is.

Bill Clinton provided a fine example of distorting words to suit your own purpose but no one believed his bull*** either.

roy gsd

[Marvo]

You can buy it, but you can never own it.

Maybe that should read "you can PAY FOR it, but you can never own it".

This philosophical debate makes great reading and I thank Paul MBMG for the "entertainment"

Surely, barring inheritance issues etc., the only real issue here is:

If you have "paid for" a house and/or piece of land, the only thing relevant to 99.999% of us is "can I freely transfer title of this land to whoever wants it, in exchange for an agreed sum of money?" Notwithstanding, "ownership" should not be time-limited, otherwise it can not be called ownership. There are many different words in the english language to communicate these alternative options e.g. "lease".

Oh I can hear the reply being typed already... Freehold is not ownership, it is only effectively an eternal usufruct/superficies/lease from the state.

Good luck to whoever wants to try to convince the remaing 0.001% of suckers/punters/marks that "ownership" of an asset that plumets to zero value over 30 years is anything other than rental.

Edited June 25, 2008 by Marvo

[klikster]

Correct klikster - in most countries in the world, Thailand being no different. I agree - mortals cannot own land - almost anywhere, not just Thailand, irrrespective of their nationality.

This is BS and you know it. Freehold ownership has been the definition of this topic from the beginning

Residential land entitlemnt does come with BoI - we have set these up so I can confirm that from experience. Foreigners have bough banks on several occasions in the last few years - you've never heard of ABN, UOB, Standard Chartered, etc etc

Now you're falling back on "entitlement" which is another smokescreen

owning protected shares in a company that owns freehold is clear enough for many people who understand these things

It surely is clear .. you own some shares, no mystery there

as for the rest you can't own the plante only take a freehold interest so arguing about the restrictions on that freehold interest as not meeting the legal definition of owning an asset that no-one is entitled to own is just too bizarre for me

More BS

I'll carry on spending my days helping people to acquire the levels of interest in property that they personally aspire to and let you chaps discurse as to which definition of legal ownership doesn't apply most to an asset that can only ever be acquired not owned, not just by foreigners in Thailand but by anyone anywhere.

More smoke and mirrors. Your real motive for posting this drivel had become clear.

An individual or a foreign company cannot legally "acquire", dispose of at the time and in the manner they see fit, bequeath, or hold in perpetuity; a freehold interest in real property (land) in Thailand.

[klikster]

You can buy it, but you can never own it.

Maybe that should read "you can PAY FOR it, but you can never own it".

I can accept that .. but a few others won't.

[roygsd]

Then you have the tiny lunatic fringe that think they are smarter than everyone else including the Laws of Thailand.

It is their obsession to be the guy that can game the system. So much that even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary will insist they "own" land here.

Trying to talk sense to them is a waste of breath.

Bit lik ethose guys who think the "own" their lady

roy gsd

[Paul MBMG]

ownership= freehold

excluded from purchasing freehold land = non ownership simply a right of use for a set time.

roy gsd

so, Roy, as I said, if you want freehold you use one of the methods that give you freehold

to me it's quite simple

1) for those who only want freehold interest in their own name there are 3 bases within Thai law that I listed of obatining that

2) for those who wnat a right to a freehold interest there are sveral more ways of obtaining that

3) for those happy with a leasehold there are various options around that

End of story, everything else is semantics

for me 1) & 2) would amount to my personal definition of ownership

3) usually wouldn't but each to their own