Illegal For Thai Wives Of Foreigners To Own Land

[Mobi]

Saw this short and rather disturbing blurb in the Chiangmai Mail:

Using Thai wife as land purchase nominee is illegal, states Minister

CMM reporters

During his nationwide inspection tour of 30 provinces, Anuwat Meteewiboonwut, the director-general of the Thai government’s Land Department, reiterated that any foreigner who uses a Thai nominee—even if the person is his legal wife—to purchase land in the kingdom will have the title deeds of the land revoked if caught.

Pressed to explain further, he stated that if a Thai wife can fund the purchase of land and a house herself, no law is broken. However, if her husband gives her money from his funds to make the purchase, and is discovered to have done so, this will be regarded as an illegal act and the title deeds will be revoked.

Anuwat’s tour is aimed at improving public services in 3 areas, dress, conduct to the public and the clearing of a backlog of work.

I have no idea why such an important topic that must effect literally thousands of readers to this forum is closed yet again!!! (I know, the OP requested, it, but it is clear that he didn't realise this may be a new development, and also probably didn't realise the original thread was closed).

This same official who originally spoke in Phuket, is now being quoted in the Chiang Mai press. Does this relate to a new pronouncement in Chiang Mai, or does it relate to his earlier statement in Phuket?

Does anyone know?

If he is going round the country making the same statement then maybe it's time someone started to take notice.

Surely, if any topic is worthy of discussion it is this one?

How hard is it to delete inflammatory or irrelevant posts?

Can we keep this one open please?

[steelepulse]

I thought this issue had closure due to the fact that if the wife signs the paper saying the money to buy the land is hers, then end of story.  Did I miss something else?

[thaihome]

I reckon its because people, like you, refuse to understand that this is issue is about nominees and not a wife buying the land directly and the foreign husband signing the statement that he has no claim on the money used to buy it.

Definition of a nominee:

“A person or organization in whose name a security or land is registered though true ownership is held by another party.”

If a Thai wife has purchased land in her name with money the husband has stated he has no claim to, how is that a nominee setup? This was amply explained by the resident legal expert that this was only meant to applying to people setting up companies with Thai nominees, including spouses, for the purpose of owning land, not a Thai person buying land directly in their name.

Hopefully this thread will closed soon as well.

TH

[monty]

I have had my staff, who is well connected at the land and house department, seek clarifications on the statements made by Mr. Anuwat recently.

Unfortunately, this official refuses to be quoted by name, as for the obvious reasons.

In short, the following is his explanation:

If a Thai person is married to a foreigner, and wishes to register land in her name, it is required for both husband and wife to sign a statement, that the acquired property will remain the sole personal property (Sin Suan Tua) of the Thai partner, as opposed to common matrimonial property (Sin Som Ros) where the latter would normally be the case as per the civil law regarding marriages.

It is clear in this case that the Thai person is 100% owner, entirely on her own behalf, and as such can never be seen as a nominee holding land on someone else's behalf, as there is nobody who, under Thai civil law could make a claim to the land apart form said Thai owner.

There are however spouses who have kept on their Thai Maiden names (as they are legally allowed to do so), and neglect to state that they are married to a foreigner. As such the above mentioned statement does not get signed.

If in this case the funds used to acquire the land are supplied solely by the foreigner, and the foreigner would be able to prove that the funds have been acquired by him previous to the marriage, then according to the Thai civil law, the land would be the sole property of the foreigner (SIn Suan Tua), regardless of whose name the land is registered in. The Thai partner would only be owner of any increase in value acrued during the marriage on a 50% base (as this gain in value would be Sin Som Ros), or according to any pre-nuptial agreements.

In this case it is clear that the Thai partner in the marriage is a nominee, holding the land on behalf of the foreigner, as at all times, either during the marriage or after a divorce, the foreigner can lay claim to the land as per the laws on Sin Suan Tua/Sin Som Ros.

Mr. Anuwat also clearly states, that even if the Thai partner neglected to mention the fact that her husband is a foreigner, and never signed the statement, BUT she can prove that the land has been acquired with her own funds, then she can remain the legal owner of the land since per Thai civil law the land will be her personal property (Sin Suan Tua).

[Crossy]

After discussion with the wiser ones, and a PM exchange with Mobi (the OP) I'm re-opening this thread.

Below is an extract from a PM I got from Mobi, he has some excellent discussion points and valid concerns. Let's keep our comments to these topics please

I agree that Monty has posted a good clarification on the issue.

However my main point was to ask whether this guy Anuwat is spewing his legal interpretations all over Thailand, or has the CM press simply picked up what he said in Phuket.

If he is going round the country scaring all the farangs with wives who own property, then I think it is worthy of further discussion.

BTW it doesn't affect me personally, as all the relevant papers were signed at the land office, and she used her (my) married name and I was issued with a usufruct.

I am concerned for those, some elderly, who often panic when this sort of stuff is espoused by "anti farang" land officers.

What about those whose wives didn't declare they were married? Any advice for them? Anyway to regularise the legalities?

[tijnebijn]

Indeed a very good initiative from the OP to keep this thread open to help each other out .

I just posted in another thread that my wife bought her ground before we got married ,

we did marry 2 years after and she changed the name on the landpaper as she has changed her backname accordingly .

Now I don't know if we should have signed something because of her marital status now ,

in this case do she/we have to sign anything or not ?

Got a bit confused on this one , thanks .

Edited June 3, 2009 by tijnebijn

[Crossy]

Indeed a very good initiative from the OP to keep this thread open to help each other out .

Now I don't know if we should have signed something because of her marital status now ,

in this case do she/we have to sign anything or not ?

The whole issue addled my mind too.

Taking into account Monty's excellent clarification it is my interpretation, that since the property was acquired BEFORE you married it is her sole personal property (Sin Suan Tua) and you can never have any call on it. This being the case there is no need to renounce your rights by signing the declaration, as you never had any

[tijnebijn]

Indeed a very good initiative from the OP to keep this thread open to help each other out .

Now I don't know if we should have signed something because of her marital status now ,

in this case do she/we have to sign anything or not ?

The whole issue addled my mind too.

Taking into account Monty's excellent clarification it is my interpretation, that since the property was acquired BEFORE you married it is her sole personal property (Sin Suan Tua) and you can never have any call on it. This being the case there is no need to renounce your rights by signing the declaration, as you never had any

This is what I thought also , thanks for your clarification Crossy , much appreciated here .

But as we have so many unclear questions and scenarios on our minds , there is another thing .

Perhaps you can help me some , first because I have no rights to claim anything what happens if my wifes passes over ?

We have 2 kids , one of our own and one of her previous marriage who's father has passed over .

I assume they inherit the whole bunch if it does happen , would you think it is smart to make a will ? ( lawyer or Ampuh )

Another thing is my oldest ( stephson ) does not have our family name , but we want to , think adoption is difficult ,

but I know he can do what he pleases when he turns 20 ( in 3 years time ) .

he has got 2 half brothers on his other side and we don't want anything to go to them if something might happen to him ,

everything unless he has chidren from himself got to go to our other son ...perhaps change name make a will stating that for him . We want them to have equal inheriting status .

My impression is that when I'm at advanced age , my children can take care of me if I'm financially not able to , the main thing is that I live with them , on our property ofcourse . I don't care about anything in my name , just assurance I can stay

at my lovely home till I hopefully pass at an old age .

Thanks for your input , and thats all for now .

[Crossy]

But as we have so many unclear questions and scenarios on our minds , there is another thing .

Perhaps you can help me some , first because I have no rights to claim anything what happens if my wifes passes over ?

We have 2 kids , one of our own ............

.........financially not able to , the main thing is that I live with them , on our property ofcourse . I don't care about anything in my name , just assurance I can stay

at my lovely home till I hopefully pass at an old age .

I am no expert but IMHO as a minimum you should:-

1. Employ a good lawyer conversant with family law.
   
2. Your wife should make a will.
   
3. You should make a will covering your Thai property, and one in your home country covering your other property.
   
4. You need to arrange a means whereby you remain in your home should your wife pre-decease you (lease or usufruct)
   

[tijnebijn]

Interesting tips you gave there , I think we should take care of it as quick as possible .

No1 and No 2 , I had a recommendation of a trustworthy lawyer before .

No3 I don't have yet any property in Thailand exept my car and motorbike . In my home country

everything is taking care of .

No4 not sure how to create a usufruct , when does the timeframe goes into effect ?

After she deceases before me or immediately ? Not sure if a lease or whatever may help cause we are still

only in our mid thirties . And also I do not mistrust my children when they are the owners , don't feel the need to .

But its something to consider though .

Thanks again .

Edited June 3, 2009 by tijnebijn

[piet pompies]

Can anyone explain "revoke"? The title goes back to the previous owner who was a Thai lady married to a foreigner.. and then what? Or does the state get the land.?

[Crossy]

No4 not sure how to create a usufruct , when does the timeframe goes into effect ?

After she deceases before me or immediately ? Not sure if a lease or whatever may help cause we are still

only in our mid thirties . And also I do not mistrust my children when they are the owners , don't feel the need to .

You need to sort an usufruct ASAP, your lawyer will know how. IIRC it's pretty cheap. Usufruct gives you lifetime use of the land no matter who it belongs to (handy as you are both still young).

[churchill]

Can somebody please advise ?

At present my house / land is owned by a company where I and my wife have shares - I am thinking of taking a loan and the only way to do this - It seems is for me to sell the companies land/house to my wife .

Is there a secure contract that can be drawn up to protect my interests in the unlikely event of either her death or a split . We have a 3 year old daughter so I cannot see a split occurring but who knows ?

Or is it better to forget the loan and leave the ownership as it is - basically in a Thai Company where I have a share ( about 49%)

[Gary A]

A tempest in a tea pot. NOTHING has changed. It only restates that nominees are illegal. Nominees have always been illegal whether the nominee is your wife or not. This only highlights that bogus companies will eventually be prosecuted. My wife has a number of properties that are in her name and I have no claim to them. I signed the document that I have no financial in HER properties. Why this must be rehashed time and time again is beyond me. The bottom line is that you CANNOT own land in Thailand unless you trust your Thai wife.

[bojo]

Can somebody please advise ?

At present my house / land is owned by a company where I and my wife have shares - I am thinking of taking a loan and the only way to do this - It seems is for me to sell the companies land/house to my wife .

Is there a secure contract that can be drawn up to protect my interests in the unlikely event of either her death or a split . We have a 3 year old daughter so I cannot see a split occurring but who knows ?

Or is it better to forget the loan and leave the ownership as it is - basically in a Thai Company where I have a share ( about 49%)

Loans are quite hard to come by right now but probably easier to obtain if the property is in your wife's name . Taxes will have to be paid also when transferring from company to wife, could be expensive depending on land office's valuation. Then you will have to sign a form saying she has bought the property with her own cash etc.

I've not read all the threads but I would assume their is no contract that could be drawn up that would protect you in the event of a split after signing the form at land office. In event of death a will should cover that i imagine.

Regarding your current company set up...Even with you having a share(49%) I assume your wife is the director and signatory, she's at the helm and has total control over everything.

You could consider 'usufruct' which will give you rights over the premises.

Seek good legal advice, is the best next step.

Regards Bojo

[Nowhereman60]

I want to know when the land office tries to inforce this ruling. Then it would be coming interesting. Now it is nothing but I but of jail house lawyers debating the issue.

[Mobi]

A tempest in a tea pot. NOTHING has changed. It only restates that nominees are illegal. Nominees have always been illegal whether the nominee is your wife or not. This only highlights that bogus companies will eventually be prosecuted. My wife has a number of properties that are in her name and I have no claim to them. I signed the document that I have no financial in HER properties. Why this must be rehashed time and time again is beyond me. The bottom line is that you CANNOT own land in Thailand unless you trust your Thai wife.

If you are quite happy with your situation and you understand the law as it applies to you then fine.

However there are some that are not in the clear - like those whose wives didn't report that they were married. What about them? what should they do to correct the situation?

And what about this director of the land department who is travelling the country spreading fear in farangs' hearts wherever he goes? You know as well as I do that local land officers have a penchant for interpreting the law how they see fit, and once a decision is made, rightly or wrongly, they are rarely gainsaid. I know this from personal experience.

I think this is still an important subject, and there are many people who are still confused, or do not know what to do.

You don't have to read this thread or contribute to it.

Why don't you complain about all the other more trivial subjects that have been done to death over and over again through the years? Like all those about Thai women and Thai wives,Thai girl friends and Lady boys for starters.

[Gary A]

Mobi, the very bottom line is that you CANNOT own land in Thailand. Those who own land through bogus Thai companies may or may not be caught. Regardless of how you manipulate the law, it is illegal to own or even control land. As far as I know, unscrupulous lawyers are still forming these bogus companies. I was not happy to own a condo rather than a home, but I did my homework and decided that I like to sleep at night and if I had bought a home via a bogus company, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night. I'm not trying to criticize anyone because it would appear that people actually believed they were doing nothing wrong.

[churchill]

If one has a Thai Partner and you give him/her a business loan to invest in a project- for instance - Land/House even if that project is in your partners name would you not have some hold over the assets once the project was sold ? Even if it was only the return on your initial investment forgetting any gains ?

[bojo]

If one has a Thai Partner and you give him/her a business loan to invest in a project- for instance - Land/House even if that project is in your partners name would you not have some hold over the assets once the project was sold ? Even if it was only the return on your initial investment forgetting any gains ?

I would imagine that you are only protected by the law if you have a legal and binding contract with your partner. Going to court and actually receiving money on the grounds of a court order made (after maybe years of getting there) could be another thing though.

If you're referring to your 'partner' as your wife, then I'm afraid I'm not qualified to answer the question correctly, but hazarding a guess, I would say that the wife would if she wanted to .. keep everything at least that seems to be what's happened to most cases I've heard about. Have you registered a usufruct against the property to protect your interests? If not yet, could you still do so?

I think good legal advice is the best advice one could receive.

Regards Bojo

[donx]

However there are some that are not in the clear - like those whose wives didn't report that they were married. What about them? what should they do to correct the situation?

This situation applies to me. I went to the land department with my wife and kids ready and willing to sign away my rights to the land she was buying only to be told I didn't have to do anything because my wife's Thai ID card still listed her as single. Now it was my wife that told me this, but someone else told her. I don't know who it was. It might have been her brother, her cousin, the seller, or an official at the land department. I didn't really like this because I knew I was supposed to sign the document but with my wife being the only one around able to speak English and with the land deal too good to pass up I didn't press the issue. The seller already had someone willing to pay 250,000 baht/rai more if the deal didn't go through - we paid a deposit and had a signed purchase agreement in place.

Discussions about how I could remedy the situation are of great interest to me, so thank you mods for allowing this topic to remain open.

[thaiwanderer]

Journalism being what it is the official may have said it again or it may be a re-hash of his previous comments. Either way its irrelevant.

He is either being misquoted or is being provocative. In any case the position attributed to him is incorrect.

As explained eloquently above if the farang signs the declaration there is no problem. The Thai wife is the owner and the farang has no claim.

If the declaration was not signed (for whatever reason) what to do now?

Nothing. For the overcautious prepare a private deed confirming you have no interest but I would suggest it would be foolhardy to approach the land office on the basis of these news stories saying you want to file the declaration.

If (and its a very big if) you are investigated then declare you have no interest - no problem.

Unless of course you are a farang whose wife acquired land in your place - but that was illegal long before these attributed comments anyway. So the real worry would appear to be that they may actually enforce the law. ooops!

Edited June 3, 2009 by thaiwanderer

[Mobi]

Gary,

I know that.

Most of us know that, but that is not the point of this thread.

Please read what I have written.

This thread isn't about farangs owning land. It's about Thai wives owning land who may have a problem.

And if they have a problem, there may or may not be a solution.

I used to "own" land through a company. I knew it was illegal, but just followed the herd.

Then when I realised that I would never sleep easy at night I took steps to correct the problem, which I believe I now have done. I still get farangs telling me almost every day that I panicked and wasted my money. I don't think so.

So maybe these wives can also take steps to correct their problem. That's what this thread is about.

Got it?

[MJP]

Anyone know about putting land etc into trust for your kids to stop the philandering wife giving it away to a dope head boyfriend.

Need help.

SOS!

[thaiwanderer]

from Thai wife's perspective:

is there a problem? as certain as can ever be, NOPE

however if she is that worried what should she do?

- go to the land office and have farang husband file declaration now - IMHO (over reaction aside) would at the very least just be inviting a tea money request

or

- prepare a private deed - job done, not drawing attention to potential problem the potential consequences of which are whats (irrationally) worrying the person - this (or simply doing nothing) is IMHO the best way forward even if worried about potential consequences for Thai wife - does anyone in their wildest dreams honestly envisage the consequences of an (unlikely anyway) crackdown actually resulting in chanotes being revoked in these circumstances?

IMHO in the highly unlikely event of a crackdown the farang will be required to sign a declaration retrospectively.

(this all of course depends on the land official not being misquoted and or talking out of his backside in the first place - i don't understand why this should be a worry to anybody let alone a Thai who is accustomed to big false talk uncritically spewed in the media or a farang who has not just stepped of the plane - its a lot of fuss about nothing)

[meom]

A tempest in a tea pot. NOTHING has changed. It only restates that nominees are illegal. Nominees have always been illegal whether the nominee is your wife or not. This only highlights that bogus companies will eventually be prosecuted. My wife has a number of properties that are in her name and I have no claim to them. I signed the document that I have no financial in HER properties. Why this must be rehashed time and time again is beyond me. The bottom line is that you CANNOT own land in Thailand unless you trust your Thai wife.

If you are quite happy with your situation and you understand the law as it applies to you then fine.

However there are some that are not in the clear - like those whose wives didn't report that they were married. What about them? what should they do to correct the situation?

Going by Monty's explanation wives that didn't report that they were married will not have a problem as long as the marriage lasts.

Not sure what happens in case of divorce. In theory the husband could tell the court that he paid for the land and the wife acted as nominee in which case the wife would lose the land which would be sweet revenge for the husband who would end up without the land anyway.

Bit far fledged I know and I don't see any court case like this happening soon.

[Mario2008]

That is a good point. But then the husband does have to show that he paid for it. If he can show a large transfer to his wife's account he could take revenge in that way. If the wife has enough money of her own she can argue that she paid for it herself.

[monty]

A tempest in a tea pot. NOTHING has changed. It only restates that nominees are illegal. Nominees have always been illegal whether the nominee is your wife or not. This only highlights that bogus companies will eventually be prosecuted. My wife has a number of properties that are in her name and I have no claim to them. I signed the document that I have no financial in HER properties. Why this must be rehashed time and time again is beyond me. The bottom line is that you CANNOT own land in Thailand unless you trust your Thai wife.

If you are quite happy with your situation and you understand the law as it applies to you then fine.

However there are some that are not in the clear - like those whose wives didn't report that they were married. What about them? what should they do to correct the situation?

Going by Monty's explanation wives that didn't report that they were married will not have a problem as long as the marriage lasts.

Not sure what happens in case of divorce. In theory the husband could tell the court that he paid for the land and the wife acted as nominee in which case the wife would lose the land which would be sweet revenge for the husband who would end up without the land anyway.

Bit far fledged I know and I don't see any court case like this happening soon.

Not exactly true. The wife could get investigated anytime (as Mr. Anuwat indicated) and unless she can prove she bought the property with her own land, then they could initiate procedures to revoke the ownership!

And actually, the courts have several times shown leniency towards the foreign husbands when divorcing, giving them 50% of the value of the land and the house, even though they relinquished rights to it! I know personally of several cases!

Many judges are of the notion that the paper is there solely to satisfy land ownership laws, and for them the actual civil laws on Sin Som Ros and Sin Suan Tua are of more importance and will decide how they split the property!

Indeed the husband can never own the land, but if the wife can't pony up the cash to settle the 50%, the judge can order the property disposed of and then share the spoils!

Or the husband can pay the 50% of the value to the ex-wife and then either dispose of the property or change the ownership (new wife etc...)

[meom]

Thanks for your explanation Monty. Sure I am getting pretty confused now. Isn’t land owned by the wife automatically Sin Sua Tua, irrespective whether the husband paid for it or not since land ownership rules prohibit it to be Sin Som Ros and as such how it can be part of a divorce settlement and be treated as Sin Som Ros?

TIT I guess

[monty]

Thanks for your explanation Monty. Sure I am getting pretty confused now. Isn’t land owned by the wife automatically Sin Sua Tua, irrespective whether the husband paid for it or not since land ownership rules prohibit it to be Sin Som Ros and as such how it can be part of a divorce settlement and be treated as Sin Som Ros?

TIT I guess

Indeed confusing, but it is how the Thai law works in regards to foreigners.

According to the constitution all laws apply equal to foreigners and Thai nationals unless there are specific laws made up for foreigners. One such law is the law on land ownership.

Civil law, especially in this case (on marriage), applies 100% the same for Thai couples or for mixed couples. There is nowhere specifically written that land owned by the wife is automatically Sin Suan Tua.

So unless the foreigner signs that statement, the land will become Sin Som Ros, or even Sin Suan Tua from the foreigner if the land is bought with money he earned before his marriage.

Which is the reason that until a few years ago, a Thai women married with a foreigner could simply not own land! Until they made up that statement for the foreign partner to sign. It simply brings two sets of law in agreement so the wife can own land again...