True or untrue

[sting01]

Hi there,

since some few days, we hear this and that about Visa, people under arrest, borders closed ..... bla blabla

For what I know, and for what I experienced :

here , as in our respective countries there is laws, and if you don't follow them you will have troubles.

The fact to cross the border every 30 days, stay at least one night out the kingdom and coming and ask to have another 30 days is till today ABSOLUTELY legal. I am sorry for those who said it's not.

Mostly the personns who were involved in the fake stamps are : or innocent an stupid tourists who were just stay a little bit more ..... or corporate people who were too lazy, or too busy to make money here to follow the rules. There is funny to know mostly there is the same personns who are and the target for the 1 M bht card, and the visa crackdown. Maybe the scam is not only in Kao San Road, but also were neck tie adn white shirt?

For wht I know, and following my visa run to Pol pet this sunday, where all was quiet, noboddy have check deeply my passport, and I met the same immigration officer than the past 18 month, I think there is no need to be too much scare, but it's need just to do the things how they must be done.

It will be better for most of us, who own small business, to htink about the new regulations .... There is a topic why is hidding, but it's sure this topic not interest the corporate..

Regards

Sting

Roxaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaane

[dr_Pat_Pong]

It will be better for most of us, who own small business, to htink about the new regulations .... There is a topic why is hidding, but it's sure this topic not interest the corporate..

Are you are running a small business and using 30 day visa ? If you are, do you realize the illegality of running a business  whilst on a tourist visa?

[sting01]

rulling a small business in LOS ? I always thought only Thai citisens or US citisens can do that. The other nationalities ( must be about 150 other nationalities in the world) can only invest till 49 % of the shareholders.

As I am not Thai, not US, I can NOT rulle a business ... maybe IF I invested some bucks in some business it would be POSSIBLE for me to check how my investment go ...

There is only supposition, the key aords are IF and possible ... it's like the personn who mailed me and told me they COULD given to me some FRIENDLY places to get a visa ... It could be interresteing IF I was moron enough (as some corporate I know) to use visa shop . Do legally only legal stuffs is a rule in my country

[Sunbelt Asia]

Actually Sting1 there are many ways the other 150 nationalities can legally control and manage a business in Thailand. Here are several.

1. You can be the managing Director of a Limited Company and bind the company. You can have preferential classes of stock, even if you have fewer shares, you have more voting rights.

2. Board of Investment- you can own a business 100%.  You can have tax Holiday for 8 years, own land, no import or export tax for your company either.

3. Manufactures usually can acquire an Alien Business Permit and majority foreign ownership is allowed.

4.  The use of a holding and operating company.  

Their are ways to be legal here in Thailand!

[sting01]

you right sunbelt, but the key word in htis hypothetical conversation was "small" if too small, no BOI, nothig of what you describe.

Whatever , I take good note of what you said, maybe for the future it will be great for me to settle something like that in the Kingdom.

Best regards

Sting

Mesage in a bottle

[dropout]

And don't forget that if you are American, you can own 100% of a business in Thailand with some caveats.

[Sunbelt Asia]

Hi Sting,

I know of a number of companies which were registered for as low as one million Baht capital and obtained BOI status. One is in the movie business and another in software.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Are there many million bahter's with BOI privileges Greg ? One Million that is.

[Guest IT Manager]

rulling a small business in LOS ? I always thought only Thai citisens or US citisens can do that. The other nationalities ( must be about 150 other nationalities in the world) can only invest till 49 % of the shareholders.

I have just set up my 68th company for a client. Worked very well. I million baht registered caital, 6 thai partners and the foreigner, articles of association etc.

It's not big money but its a living.

details at www.chiangmaimall.com

######

[Guest IT Manager]

And don't forget that if you are American, you can own 100% of a business in Thailand with some caveats.

Main one being there is no such thing as a sole trader, so you need two of you (both American).

Details on www.chiangmaimall.com

[dropout]

My understanding is you need 7 shareholders only 1 of whom has to be American.  Is that correct or are you saying 2 americans are required?

[Indo-Siam]

###### -  Technically, Americans are eligible to be sole proprietors in Thailand - and I am looking at the Amity Treaty papers from US Commercial Service right now, picked up yesterday, that outline SP process for Americans filing under the Treaty.

I will say that I would have significant reservations about being a SP in Thailand - insofar as SP status exposes you to unlimited personal liability for claims against your business.

But being a SP is made possible for Americans,under the Treaty.

Dropout -  You can set up an Amity company with one American holding 19,994 shares, and six Thais holding one share each.  All that matters is American majority ownership.

Cheers!

Steve

Indo-Siam

[Butterfly]

Wasn't that special provision being scrapped by the Thai government as we speak ? or could be scrapped very soon ?

[Rinrada]

Seem to remember reading somewhere that the Amity Treaty is against W.T.O.rules and will be srapped.

Also may have certain positive implications with respect to duel Legality re:having a Thai husband/wife with residency and nationality rights,but dont hold your breath. ???

[dropout]

I believe that the amity agreement expires under its own terms at the end of next year.  However, in all probability, it will be replaced by a bilateral FTA with even more generous terms to the US if the FTA between the US and Singapore is any indication.  The negotiation of this agreement will likely be announced next month during apec. However, its unlikely real estate ownership will be affacted but US citizens will be able to bring their money in and out at will, be able to set up financial services co., insurance co.s,, maybe practice law, have tourist agencies and a few other areas of liberalization including 1 or 2 US owned banks.   The business elite in Thailand are chomping at the bit to get this done because of the benefitis of doing business in ths US but such an agreement seems to fly in the face of the govt's current nationalistic push.  The Japanese will also likely have a hissy fit.   I still think it will get done.  Despite the nationalistic rhetoric,  Thailand needs the US too much both economically and militarily not to complete the agreement particularly with the emergence of China as an economic powerhouse.

[JonnieB]

yes, i think the treaty expires next year and both countries will not renew it and go with the FTA.  however, the treaty can also be abrogated upon 4 or 6 months notice by either party, so it may go out of existence earlier.

i am not sure if, for americans, it will be a better or worse situation with the FTA than with the Treaty.  now, we are the only nationality that can legally own lock stock and barrel a thai corporation (with certain limitations).  no one else can do this...quite a plum i would say.  these rules technically violate wto rules requiring equal treatment of all foreign investors in a countries economy (FOI).  that is why the treaty has to be scrapped.  what better benefits the FTA will have over Amity seem more likely to benefit larger business operations and those expecially in export/import businesses and not all the little small businesses most of us expats are involved in (either to keep the misses busy or assist in our visa matters).

maybe someone with more knowledge of FTA's can enlighten us on the benefits.

japan should be okay with the FTA as they are in the midst of negotiating their own with thailand.

[Indo-Siam]

I am not promoting the Treaty - I am an American, but I did not set up my company this way (I saw no compelling advantage).  I was simply reporting what was current as of 29 September.

I suspect that existing Amity companies will be "grandfathered" by default - the alternative would be to order all such existing companiesto close, or give away shares to Thais - both of which would appear unlikely.

Steve

Indo-Siam

[dropout]

Unless relations between the US and Thailand deteriorate significantly over the next year, the FTA will be signed and US individuals and companies will be in a much better position than they are under the current amity agreement.  A cursory review of the agreements with Singapore and Chile bear this out.  Speculating that the US will somehow accept less or obtain fewer advantages than what it is currently receiving under the amity agreement indicates a lack of awareness of the nature and implication of these agreements.  It is much, much more important for Thai business interests to obtain this FTA or continue the Amity agreement than for US business interests. The US is Thailand's largest trading partner, Thailand is a small fry for the US. Not only will trade barriers be removed but barriers to performing financial and professional services by US citiznes and companies in Thailand will be significantly liberalized, and vice versa.  Furthermore, in order to get this agreement, Thailand will have to allow 1 or 2 American owned banks to operate here and will have to allow complete mobility of capital to and from the US agreeing never to restrict capital flows.  This is huge because as a US investor here it means I will never have to worry about Thailand preventing me from repatriating my investment portfolio.

[samran]

It will be intersting to look at the upcoming Australian-Thailand FTA, as it may indicate the basic structure of any potential Thai-US FTA.

The following website gives an update as to the progress of negotations between Australia and Thailand, and a suprisingly frank discussion on the respective positions of both countries in relation to the status of the negotiaions.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/...a_thailand.html

[dropout]

samran,

Interesting info but not very detailed.  Also,  I think that the FTA between the US and Singapore or the US and Chile is likely to more indicative of what is likely to transpire between the US and Thailand.  Thailand is much more heavily dependent on exporting to the US. In addition, the US simply has a great deal more economic and military clout than Australia even in SE Asia. This means the US gets better terms ergo the US Amity treaty. Furthermore, the US has been rather inflexible on the required terms for its agreement. They have taken pretty much a take it or leave it type attitude.  I also don't see the US pissing off Singapore, a much more significant trading partner, by giving Thailand more favorable terms. I'm guessing it will be pretty much the same terms.

FTA US SINGAPORE TEXT

[Sunbelt Asia]

Are there many million bahter's with BOI privileges Greg ?

Yes..

http://www.boi.go.th/cgi-bin/cdb.pl?language=english

[dropout]

Another reason Thailand really wants an FTA so they can send their kiddies to school and work in the US.  See quote from WSJ:

"Some 20,000 applications from the last federal fiscal year are likely to be approved in the fiscal year that starts Wednesday, and nearly 7,000 H-1B visas have been set aside for applicants from Chile and Singapore under free-trade pacts."

Not surprisingly there is no restriction on the number of professionals that can go to Singapore or Chile and work.  Business visas are like gold to rich, elite Thais who want to set up shop in the US.

[Sunbelt Asia]

You can set up an Amity company with one American holding 19,994 shares, and six Thais holding one share each.  All that matters is American majority ownership.

Sorry Steve you are wrong on this one... you need minimum 4 Americans for the Amity and % of stock with a limited company. The majority or same number of Directors being American as well.

You may be interested to know that it was 3 million Baht paid up capital requirement for Amity. Most people are not aware; they don't have that requirement now. Of course the work permit of 2 million applies, if you will work in the business.

[Sunbelt Asia]

Another reason Thailand really wants an FTA so they can send their kiddies to school and work in the US.  See quote from WSJ:

They are doing that now under the E-2 and L-1 Visa. The third largest city for Thais is Los Angeles, California. Over 100,000 Thais live in LA. Far many Thais were granted E-2 status than Americans applied with the Amity treaty.

[Butterfly]

I read in the Bangkok Post that Thailand did call off the agreement before it expired because it was going to be re-negociated anyhow. The reasons they did this early is because some US company was planning a take over of an important Thai company and didn't want this to happen. Will try to find the story.

[samran]

Thailand is much more heavily dependent on exporting to the US. In addition, the US simply has a great deal more economic and military clout than Australia even in SE Asia. This means the US gets better terms ergo the US Amity treaty.

No argument with you there dropout!!

To be honest, I don't think Thailand is going to get very much out of a US FTA. The US will at least keep what it has already under the Amity Treaty, but in the form of an FTA.

However, given Dear Leader Thaksins support for the US during Iraq (ie zitch), the US is not in much in the mood to reward Thailand with a comprehensive FTA (a la Australia or Singapore).

My best guess: FTA with Thailand will happen, which maintains at least the staus quo, but most likely the US will get increased access on issues such as investment, banking and recognition of professional qualifications (ie no more lawyers and accountants here with "consultant" written on the work permit!).

The US will likely throw Thailand a bone of some sort...perhaps "Dubbya" will allow "Dear Leader Thaksin" to get another photo with him at the white house or something along those lines. Thaksin will be able to declare how good a PM he is and how the Thai **** Thai is doing good things for the Thai people, and life will continue.

Cheers

Samran

ps. sorry for the sarcasm..another bad day at work in the employ of the RTG!!

[Guest IT Manager]

Sorry Steve you are wrong on this one... you need minimum 4 Americans for the Amity and % of stock with a limited company. The majority or same number of Directors being American as well.

You may be interested to know that it was 3 million Baht paid up capital requirement for Amity. Most people are not aware; they don't have that requirement now. Of course the work permit of 2 million applies, if you will work in the business.

Far be it from me to disagree with you, but 3 weeks ago we set up an amity company with 2million baht REGISTERED capital, not paid up capital. 1 Yank 99% a second one 1 %. The company is operational as I read the crap you call informed and continue, daily, to set up 7 shareholder, 1 (Foreign) director Thai Limited Liability Companies.

Thank you for sharing the fount of your (incomplete) knowledge, but leave it to those who actually do the work to share the truth. Unless of course things are different in different cities in the one country which strikes me as being at least unlikely, but he** what the <deleted>** would I know, I only do it for a living.

[Axel]

the crap you call informed and continue, daily, to set up 7 shareholder, 1 (Foreign) director Thai Limited Liability Companies.

Interesting to read, and cannot comment on an amity company, as I have no knowledge.

Waht's wrong with "7 shareholder, 1 (Foreign) director Thai Limited Liability Companies."?

Any easier way for non-US-citizens?

[dropout]

Sunbelt Asia,

"They are doing that now under the E-2 and L-1 Visa. The third largest city for Thais is Los Angeles, California. Over 100,000 Thais live in LA. Far many Thais were granted E-2 status than Americans applied with the Amity treaty."

I'd be curious to see what the current numbers are on the granting of these visas now.  I would hazard to guess not nearly as many Thais as before are getting in on these visas particularly the educational visas. All the reason its more important for Thais than the US to get an FTA.  The Bush administration is pushing hard to get as many bilateral FTAs as possible particularly in light of the failure of the WTO.  Its my opinion that the WTO is starting its death throes and is not long for this world in light of the trade disputes that are breaking out now.  Thats been the Bush strategy from the get go.  They figure they can get a better deal on a country by country or regional basis than through the WTO.  You can believe that the Thais are going to bend over big time to get whatever protections they can with the US before the manufacturing protectionists start erecting barriers against Asia.

[Indo-Siam]

Sorry to you Greg.  Here is reesponse received today (October 2) from Khun Kritsananan - she is THE person at US Commercial Service who administers the Amity Treaty Program (although Scott Shaw, Commercial Attache, actually signs Amity certificates) -

Dear Khun Steve,

We understand that the essence to apply for Treaty of Amity is the majority American Shareholder (one or more shareholders) must hold 51% shares onward, which mean that the company has been owned and manage by American

citizen.   There is no 4 American minimum requirement for applying the Treaty of Amity.

Hope that this information is helpful for you.

Regards,

Kritsananan Sawangvareeskul

Commercial Assistant

U.S. Embassy

The exact wording of the instruction document that is issued by her office is "....or limited company, a majority of the shareholders and directors must be U.S. citizens..."

Thai lawyers with no common sense have simply parroted this to you.  As written, Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il could each own 49% of a company, have five Americans collectively owning the other 2%, and as long as they appointed three of the Americans as directors, the company could receive Amity Treaty protection.  This is clearly absurd.

Well, using common sense, it was clear to me that the wording of the instructions was wrong.  What was meant was that the majority of shares must be held by Americans - not that the majority of shahreholders must be American.  That's how I think - using common sense.

Personally, I wonder what goes on in someone's mind when I write that I have just come from a meeting with the controlling authorities, and they said "X", and then someone tells me that their lawyers say "not-x".  This is my primary business.

Every dealing I have with Thai lawyers convinces me that they are the collectively the sorriest lot of legal types on the planet.  Anyone who depends on Thai lawyers to keep them out of trouble is asking for problems.

Steve

Indo-Siam