Well this is according to a full page in the Phuket Gazette. It was penned by Siam lawyers (I think) but I may have that wrong. I couldn't find it on a quick check of the Website. Maybe someone else can..sorry if this is a duplication.

Anyway, the main point is that 30 years is all that is recognised. This is what many had speculated for some time now. The other 30 and 30+30 - pure bull-sh+t.

See the story and make up your own mind..The date of the ahrdcopy was 27 December to 3 or 4 o January or something like that - half way into the paper.

good luck

I read that, and I believe that it's just comfirming what has been been said before.  Only 30 year leases are valid, the extensions are just a figment of sellers imagination. I've talked to many real estate sales people and after much cajoling they all agree that a 90 year lease is not valid nor legal.........subject to change...........

Anyway, the main point is that 30 years is all that is recognised. This is what many had speculated for some time now. The other 30 and 30+30 - pure bull-sh+t.

You have this turned upside down. It was always 30 years, but speculated that it could be longer. So many times that it actually managed to let people believe until this day that longer was possible.

Probably (I am sure) they read my topic about the 30+ years scam used by all developers and lawyers.

Well at least they are the first to follow the law which was always 30 years maximum.

And that is a good thing, especially in high season with many potential customers.

There are still a few other myths about securing your rights. Like usufructs with your spouse and company formation to own land.

Edited December 30, 200817 yr by Khun Jean

There are still a few other myths about securing your rights. Like usufructs with your spouse and company formation to own land.

I know that the company route is flawed (potentially), although I know plenty of people who have done this and never had a problem... but in what way is a usufruct a myth? or are we talking a myth if done with your partner (to whom you are married). As I understand it doing this with a spouse that you are not maried to is fine?

I read elsewhere that you can have more than one person named on a usufruct (adding substantial security and reducing your chance of "accidental" death!). Could I for instance list my young son by a previous marriage (still very young!), so that he could have use of the land for his lifetime? Is there an age limit?

PS don't give me advice to see a lawyer please (yawn...). I will do that if I ever seriously consider going down this route!

Yes..just to clarify about the Phuket Gazette article...

The main difference (what was new in all this), was the claim that the Land Office was now taking action. Some Officers were striking out any references to extensions/renewals, etc. The article took this to mean that there is no renewal/extension in legal terms. If the kind old freeholder decides to let you keep the land leased for another 30 years for just 10 baht, then lucky you. Kind of like winning the lottery though I suspect.

Anyway, the main point is that 30 years is all that is recognised. This is what many had speculated for some time now. The other 30 and 30+30 - pure bull-sh+t.

You have this turned upside down. It was always 30 years, but speculated that it could be longer. So many times that it actually managed to let people believe until this day that longer was possible.

Probably (I am sure) they read my topic about the 30+ years scam used by all developers and lawyers.

Well at least they are the first to follow the law which was always 30 years maximum.

And that is a good thing, especially in high season with many potential customers.

There are still a few other myths about securing your rights. Like usufructs with your spouse and company formation to own land.

It's funny, not new law and the same people who wrote the article still on their websites promote:

'''Although Thai Law stipulates that a foreigner may not own land in Thailand, there is an alternative step of owning a land in Thailand. This involves registering a Thai Limited Company. A Thai Limited Company means that 51% or more of the company must be owned by Thai Shareholders (the remaining shares may be held by non-Thais). This "Thai" company may then legally purchase land in Thailand'''.

Probably no money to be made with leases, but more with companies

EDIT:

I forgot to say, they follow with:

'''We recommend foreign investors to form a “Thai Company Limited” because the Articles of Association of this form of Company can be varied to allow greater protection for foreign minority shareholders where majority Thai ownership is required under the applicable Law. The Article of Association can be changed to authorize the foreigner to be the sole director of the company, and the only person of the company who can commit or bind the company in any contractual dealing (buying or selling land), effectively giving the minority shareholders control over the company'''

If they want to write something about new ownership restrictions they should point out the very strict investigations when transferring land to a partly foreign owned company in Phuket, meaning only allowed when it is a 100% thai owned company or real majority Thai owned company, not a fake land ownership company

Edited December 31, 200817 yr by kimmy

If they want to write something about new ownership restrictions they should point out the very strict investigations when transferring land to a partly foreign owned company in Phuket, meaning only allowed when it is a 100% thai owned company or real majority Thai owned company, not a fake land ownership company

Although - not exactly strict or thorough, tinkering on the edges only.

Agree with many above comments...nothing new here...this has always been the case. One constantly reads in the business pages about large Thai companies having to negotiate new leases for property after their 30-year lease has expired. The most recent major one being Central Pattana renewing their lease for the land under which Central Lat Prao sits from the State Railroad of Thailand (apparently it's their land). Now, don't you think if there was any legal basis for a 30+30+30 year lease or anything similar, these large and sophisticated companies would know about it and obtain such leases?

Agree with many above comments...nothing new here...this has always been the case. One constantly reads in the business pages about large Thai companies having to negotiate new leases for property after their 30-year lease has expired. The most recent major one being Central Pattana renewing their lease for the land under which Central Lat Prao sits from the State Railroad of Thailand (apparently it's their land). Now, don't you think if there was any legal basis for a 30+30+30 year lease or anything similar, these large and sophisticated companies would know about it and obtain such leases?

It always amazed me back in Scotland how many properties were actually on a 99 year lease from British Rail? I wonder if any other countries are similar?

Agree with many above comments...nothing new here...this has always been the case. One constantly reads in the business pages about large Thai companies having to negotiate new leases for property after their 30-year lease has expired. The most recent major one being Central Pattana renewing their lease for the land under which Central Lat Prao sits from the State Railroad of Thailand (apparently it's their land). Now, don't you think if there was any legal basis for a 30+30+30 year lease or anything similar, these large and sophisticated companies would know about it and obtain such leases?

It always amazed me back in Scotland how many properties were actually on a 99 year lease from British Rail? I wonder if any other countries are similar?

I would think so as at some point in their histories, most countries give out large land grants to the RR companies to facilitate the construction of the rail network. Also, in Thailand (and especially Bangkok), allot of land is owned by the Crown Property Bureau (the land management organization for the Royal Family) and many hotels, office buildings, and such sit on land leased for 30 years. I believe MBK recently or will soon have to renew their 30 year lease and the Dusit Thani Hotel is up soon as well. In Pattaya, the Montien Hotel expires is a few years.

The MBK lease has already been renewed. It was conducted using advice from my firm, Knight Frank, where we acted for Chulalongkorn University (the landlord), we also acted for the State Railway Authority of Thailand in the lease renewal of Central Ladprao's car park.