No Witch-hunt On Foreign Ownership: Lands Department

[britainmal]

I love Thailand. I think it has a beautiful Language and People. The Country is beautiful and I love the weather. Thailand does have major social and economic problems. They are also very corrupt more than America is. They are also very xenophobic against non-thai's, but they are nice people in a social and meeting sense, but they feel that their race should be dominant. This is why they don't want to allow foreigners to own land. I think if Thailand opened up like the West, they will be an advanced economy faster. Thailand open up! and accept change for the good. They will also make the Thai Language more important in the world, which would make Thailand more important in the world.

[Oberkommando]

but they feel that their race should be dominant. This is why they don't want to allow foreigners to own land.

No it's not.

It is beneficial for the elite ruling class to keep foreigners from owning land. In this manner they can amass large amounts of land for themselves, fix prices and keep tenants. The typical feudal model.

Foreigners push up prices, increase competition and bring unwelcome attention to things like laws, human rights and other unfairness. In short, they are a nuisance.

The biggest landowners in the country make a lot of their billions from rent and while they are in control or remain so influencial the laws regarding foreign ownership aren't ever going to change.

They don't pay any tax either.

The game is loaded.

Xenophobia and Nationalism are merely used as tools by the elites to control the populus and to support their premise that 'evil foreigners' shouldn't own hallowed Thai soil.

Of course the benefits of allowing foreigners into the market are kept quiet from Somchai the farmer and as such he must continue to tend to his rice paddies, borrowing money he can never repay using his land as collateral, until the fateful day comes when he loses his land to the rich landowners and moneylenders.

Viva la revolution.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Oberkommando

[Soutpeel]

but they feel that their race should be dominant. This is why they don't want to allow foreigners to own land.

No it's not.

It is beneficial for the elite ruling class to keep foreigners from owning land. In this manner they can amass large amounts of land for themselves, fix prices and keep tenants. The typical feudal model.

Foreigners push up prices, increase competition and bring unwelcome attention to things like laws, human rights and other unfairness. In short, they are a nuisance.

The biggest landowners in the country make a lot of their billions from rent and while they are in control or remain so influencial the laws regarding foreign ownership aren't ever going to change.

They don't pay any tax either.

The game is loaded.

Xenophobia and Nationalism are merely used as tools by the elites to control the populus and to support their premise that 'evil foreigners' shouldn't own hallowed Thai soil.

Of course the benefits of allowing foreigners into the market are kept quiet from Somchai the farmer and as such he must continue to tend to his rice paddies, borrowing money he can never repay using his land as collateral, until the fateful day comes when he loses his land to the rich landowners and moneylenders.

Viva la revolution.

......a very insightful posting and IMHO so very true

[imaneggspurt]

but they feel that their race should be dominant. This is why they don't want to allow foreigners to own land.

No it's not.

It is beneficial for the elite ruling class to keep foreigners from owning land. In this manner they can amass large amounts of land for themselves, fix prices and keep tenants. The typical feudal model.

Foreigners push up prices, increase competition and bring unwelcome attention to things like laws, human rights and other unfairness. In short, they are a nuisance.

The biggest landowners in the country make a lot of their billions from rent and while they are in control or remain so influencial the laws regarding foreign ownership aren't ever going to change.

They don't pay any tax either.

The game is loaded.

Xenophobia and Nationalism are merely used as tools by the elites to control the populus and to support their premise that 'evil foreigners' shouldn't own hallowed Thai soil.

Of course the benefits of allowing foreigners into the market are kept quiet from Somchai the farmer and as such he must continue to tend to his rice paddies, borrowing money he can never repay using his land as collateral, until the fateful day comes when he loses his land to the rich landowners and moneylenders.

Viva la revolution.

......a very insightful posting and IMHO so very true

This bit especially,.they want US to rent,....."The biggest landowners in the country make a lot of their billions from rent and while they are in control or remain so influencial the laws regarding foreign ownership aren't ever going to change."

[Ga-gai]

Your right, we've lived in this new village since it was built, about 3yrs ago and even though my 8yr old daughter has all the children around to our house most days after school with very few exceptions I am not even acknowledged by most of the parents, finding this strange I thought that with their way of thinking it could have been 1, either we appear to be better off than them or 2, perhaps it's because I'm the only falang, I have tried to instigate a conversation but get very little response.

I don't know about your ability to speak thai. When I first came here, I couldn't speak a word of thai. At that time, there were basically no thais trying to communicate or acknowledge me as a person. I was always "it" or "the thing from outer space" for them. Everything had to go through my wife and she then translated back and forth. I wouldn't wanna trade place with her, being my personal walking dictionary.

During my 10 years here, I've picked up fluent thai really well. That's because I practice the language everyday by not speaking my own language. Most thais I meet on the street usually knows who I am and often talk and say hello and ask me how I'm doing and where I'm heading. Even people that I don't know, seems to know me. They know my name and say hello etc. And why did that change, compared to the situation 10 years ago? I've learned to speak thai and the can communicate with me in a relaxed way. I've actually become a person! That's how it works. Some thai can speak some english, but they prefer not bother if it's nothing important. Not because they are ignorant. Just because they are shy, afraid to appear ridiculous if they don't understand or you understand them. Now we're talking about normal thais. Not street vendors or bar-girls. The key is: -Learn to speak Thai!

Edited June 18, 2009 by Ga-gai

[Ga-gai]

YOU CANNOT HAVE A 99 YEAR LEASE

The longest lease that the Thai courts will enforce is 30 years and if you think any different you are going to be surprised

If there were LEGAL 99 year leases we would not be having this discussion if the first place

Maybe by increasing the lease time to 50 years would be something that could satisfy most of the foreigners that wants live their second half life in this country then. I wonder how hard it would be to convince the lawmakers on having a look into this. Now is a good time, since the country is having problems with tourism and money flow. Anyone who knows whom to contact and make such suggestion?

Despite I'm a foreigner myself, I think it's good that foreigners really can't land in this country. It's a blessing for both the country and the population. No sellout of the country then. I can imaging the russians to own the whole Pattaya, if they could buy land there. Anyway... Is there any country in this region, in the whole east-asia, that actually lets foreigners to buy land? I think not. So why flaming Thailand on this issue?

Edited June 18, 2009 by Ga-gai

[wackysleet]

Ga-gai. perhaps there aren't any countries around Asia that allow foreigners to buy land but if they move to a western country and like so many do have the right to remain permanently, unlike us here, they have the right to buy land/property so it should be a two way street,....................by the way not everyone thinks Thailand is utopia.

Most people that are here are probably married to a thai I would think and just want to buy a piece of land to build a house for their family and work if needed, the upside is that just maybe the thais may learn something beneficial to the country as a whole because at the moment they are not doing a very good job of running the place.

[Soutpeel]

Despite I'm a foreigner myself, I think it's good that foreigners really can't land in this country. It's a blessing for both the country and the population. No sellout of the country then. I can imaging the russians to own the whole Pattaya, if they could buy land there. Anyway... Is there any country in this region, in the whole east-asia, that actually lets foreigners to buy land? I think not. So why flaming Thailand on this issue?

Think you are citing an exterme example Re Russians and Pattaya, If land ownership ever did come into fruition, there would need to be measures in place to stop a wholesale buyout of land, for example

Foreigners wishing to purchase land would have to be:

Residing in Thailand for a period of at least 3 to 5 years on a Non-immigrant visa, ie married to Thai national or on a work permit etc ie have a legimate reason for being settled here and wishing to buy land

Size of land purchased would be restricted to say - 1 rai maximum for that person

Leasehold duration on that land will be restricted to say 99 years

Cannot be sold on to another foreigner

To me the above or a variation on the above would be a fair compromise

[Ga-gai]

Ga-gai. perhaps there aren't any countries around Asia that allow foreigners to buy land but if they move to a western country and like so many do have the right to remain permanently, unlike us here, they have the right to buy land/property so it should be a two way street,....................by the way not everyone thinks Thailand is utopia.

Most people that are here are probably married to a thai I would think and just want to buy a piece of land to build a house for their family and work if needed, the upside is that just maybe the thais may learn something beneficial to the country as a whole because at the moment they are not doing a very good job of running the place.

You forgot to mention all those retired ones who receive such a small pension on which they can't live a descent life on in their own country. Those are more or less economic refugees here in Thailand. If you compare to all the other Asian countries around here, you will find that Thailand is probably the most generous and friendly country in the region when it comes to visas and the ability to actually live here. In what other country in this region can feel as good as you do here in Thailand?

I understand your analogy about what "they" can do in our countries and what we can't in "theirs". Well... It's probably up to each and every country to make the rules that is best for themselves. It's not like countries around the world are trading laws and rights between each other just to please the people who's crossing the borders. For myself, I can't see the need for being able to actually own the land your are living on here. If you got a Thai wife and kids, then let them own the land. That will be the heritage you pass on to your offspring after you gone. If you don't got wife and kids, then you can't take the land with you where you go in afterlife. If you don't trust your wife, then you should probably leave her. If you want to be superior to your wife and have the advantage that you can behave as you want without being afraid of get kicked out from the land that you paid for, then you probably shouldn't have a wife. Maybe you're better off as a house devil in a flat or a condo.

Changing the 30 years lease to 50 (or even better 99 years) would be a positive thing though. If they change that, all the problems are basically gone. But as a foreigner owning the land by yourself? Not really necessary at all. If you really need to have your name on the land, then I'll suggest you try to become a Thai citizen. No, not easy at all. But if the desire is that big, then that's the way to go.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Ga-gai

[Oberkommando]

If you compare to all the other Asian countries around here, you will find that Thailand is probably the most generous and friendly country in the region when it comes to visas

Malaysia and the Philippines are far more visa friendly than Thailand, especially for retirees, and Cambodia you can get tourist visas online, and extend business visas for a year for a fee without having to leave the country.

[Ga-gai]

If you compare to all the other Asian countries around here, you will find that Thailand is probably the most generous and friendly country in the region when it comes to visas

Malaysia and the Philippines are far more visa friendly than Thailand, especially for retirees, and Cambodia you can get tourist visas online, and extend business visas for a year for a fee without having to leave the country.

Not sure if I want to settle down on either of those places. But regarding visas, you may be right. But I guess they don't let you buy their land as well.

[Oberkommando]

Not sure if I want to settle down on either of those places. But regarding visas, you may be right. But I guess they don't let you buy their land as well.

You guess wrong. Malaysia a couple of years ago introduced a land purchase opportunity for foreigners to own enough land to have a house.

It doesn't sound like you know much about either place, both are very similar to Thailand in many respects but all have their positives and negatives. You'd probably be much more secure "settling down" in Malaysia than you would in Thailand though.

[mommysboy]

As one poster said at the very least it's like the sword of Damocles.

An incident waiting to happen, I say.

I'm happy to have ditched this route, and still have to face the ring stinger of winding up the company.

Never again.

[wackysleet]

Ga-gai. perhaps there aren't any countries around Asia that allow foreigners to buy land but if they move to a western country and like so many do have the right to remain permanently, unlike us here, they have the right to buy land/property so it should be a two way street,....................by the way not everyone thinks Thailand is utopia.

Most people that are here are probably married to a thai I would think and just want to buy a piece of land to build a house for their family and work if needed, the upside is that just maybe the thais may learn something beneficial to the country as a whole because at the moment they are not doing a very good job of running the place.

You forgot to mention all those retired ones who receive such a small pension on which they can't live a descent life on in their own country. Those are more or less economic refugees here in Thailand. If you compare to all the other Asian countries around here, you will find that Thailand is probably the most generous and friendly country in the region when it comes to visas and the ability to actually live here. In what other country in this region can feel as good as you do here in Thailand?

I understand your analogy about what "they" can do in our countries and what we can't in "theirs". Well... It's probably up to each and every country to make the rules that is best for themselves. It's not like countries around the world are trading laws and rights between each other just to please the people who's crossing the borders. For myself, I can't see the need for being able to actually own the land your are living on here. If you got a Thai wife and kids, then let them own the land. That will be the heritage you pass on to your offspring after you gone. If you don't got wife and kids, then you can't take the land with you where you go in afterlife. If you don't trust your wife, then you should probably leave her. If you want to be superior to your wife and have the advantage that you can behave as you want without being afraid of get kicked out from the land that you paid for, then you probably shouldn't have a wife. Maybe you're better off as a house devil in a flat or a condo.

Changing the 30 years lease to 50 (or even better 99 years) would be a positive thing though. If they change that, all the problems are basically gone. But as a foreigner owning the land by yourself? Not really necessary at all. If you really need to have your name on the land, then I'll suggest you try to become a Thai citizen. No, not easy at all. But if the desire is that big, then that's the way to go.

wackysleet

Personally I think you have got this thread completely wrong, I for one could not care less if the land is not in my name it was purchased for my family, and yes like everyone else here it's in my wifes name, and from the word go I was fully aware of the ramifications that would have, if we ever divorced.

I have been with my wife for 20yrs so I trust her completely, and as for retirees struggling in the UK. that may be, but they have other options as well so they would not starve, one can hardly live a life of o'riley even here on the UK state pension.

Unfortunately for you several of your statements are incorrect as far as other Asian countries are concerned, like a lot of people you make assumptions that have no bearing with reality, and yes countries do actually make cross border agreements.

The whole reason for this post has obviously escaped you, the law is now saying that any land purchased by the wife of a falang, will be made to sell said land unless she can prove that she had sufficient money of her own prior to the purchase other wise it will be deemed that she is really a nominee for her husband/partner.

[thaiwanderer]

The whole reason for this post has obviously escaped you, the law is now saying that any land purchased by the wife of a falang, will be made to sell said land unless she can prove that she had sufficient money of her own prior to the purchase other wise it will be deemed that she is really a nominee for her husband/partner.

the 'law' is not saying that whatsoever

[wackysleet]

The whole reason for this post has obviously escaped you, the law is now saying that any land purchased by the wife of a falang, will be made to sell said land unless she can prove that she had sufficient money of her own prior to the purchase other wise it will be deemed that she is really a nominee for her husband/partner.

the 'law' is not saying that whatsoever

wackysleet

Really, a few weeks ago he was saying exactly that and if you read the link on the first post he is still saying that, but couching it in words such as ...if there is a complaint we will look into it and deal with it, he also states that the thai spouse has to tell officials the truth when purchasing the land, well if she turned around and said ....by the way my husband/boyfriend gave me the cash to buy, then see what happens, when we went to the land office there were no questions at all.

[bunuel]

At last, a voice of reason! Hopefully those in power in the Land of Smiles will heed Mr. Jeerapaet's wise counsel and take pro-active measures to encourage foreign investment and show foreigners they are actually welcome. The inconsistent statements on regulation coming from the Land Ministry are bad for business, and bad for Thailand. No one in their right mind will want to make a long-term commitment to a country with murky regulations that threaten peace of mind. The sad irony is that the Land Minister's statements threaten those same upscale foreigners that most countries would want to have as foreign residents - after all, the riff-raff don't usually buy property ( except for bars!)

Ways sought to win back foreign buyers

BANGKOK: -- Increased government scrutiny of land purchases by foreigners will hurt investment in all types of property, says Patima Jeerapaet, managing director of the property agency Colliers International Thailand.

The quiet property market in major tourist destinations such as Phuket, Samui, Hua Hin and Pattaya will get quieter if foreigners face more difficulty buying in Thailand, he said.

Meanwhile, he said, investigations by the Lands Department could cause foreign investors to hold back or place less importance on Thailand.

"This guideline announcement [dated Jan 22, 2009] will hurt not only the residential sector but also others like industrial estates," he said.

"When the announcement was released, nothing could be done with it. I think we [government and private sector] should organise a roundtable and find an exit together."

In his view, the announcement should not have been in the form of a guideline, as this might open a loophole for corruption. The issue should be resolved with practical regulations that impose the same standards on all officials.

He recommends setting up international economic zones where foreigners can buy condominiums beyond the 49% quota if they meet the government's requirements. The leasehold period should also be extended from the current 30 years to 90 or 99 years, as in China and Vietnam, he said.

"We need to regain their confidence, which was lost after the April turbulence. Then we expected they might suspend their decisions for at least two quarters. Now it might take more than a year," he said.

To stimulate foreign demand, the government should allow local banks to consider financial support to foreign buyers. Visas based on the amount that a foreigner invests in Thailand could be another incentive.

"We don't need to promote [property purchase and investment] to new foreign residents who are unknown to us. Instead, we should promote sales to foreigners living here," he said.

As the new chairman of the property committee of the Joint Foreign Chambers of Commerce in Thailand (JFCCT), Mr Patima will propose that the government take urgent measures to stimulate foreign demand in the property market, especially through tourism as it brings in real-estate purchases.

"Land ownership by foreigners is an urgent agenda item we are researching," he said. "There are many models applicable to Thailand. We're collecting the information and doing research to see what models are most feasible."

The study covers international practices relating to property ownership by foreigners in Malaysia, Russia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. It will also examine the Japanese and Australian models.

"The most feasible model is that of the UK, as most of our laws are adapted from that country. The UK allows foreigners to buy property but we don't need to copy everything. It might be limited to zones," he said.

-- Bangkok Post 2009-06-15

[Ga-gai]

.

.

He recommends setting up international economic zones where foreigners can buy condominiums beyond the 49% quota if they meet the government's requirements. The leasehold period should also be extended from the current 30 years to 90 or 99 years, as in China and Vietnam, he said.

.

.

If they raise the lease time to 90 or 99 years, the need for allowing foreigners to actually buy land would then be obsolete. China and Vietnam seems to practice that already.

Problem solved. Case closed!

[britainmal]

It is beneficial for the elite ruling class to keep foreigners from owning land. In this manner they can amass large amounts of land for themselves, fix prices and keep tenants. The typical feudal model.

Foreigners push up prices, increase competition and bring unwelcome attention to things like laws, human rights and other unfairness. In short, they are a nuisance.

The biggest landowners in the country make a lot of their billions from rent and while they are in control or remain so influencial the laws regarding foreign ownership aren't ever going to change.

They don't pay any tax either.

The game is loaded.

Xenophobia and Nationalism are merely used as tools by the elites to control the populus and to support their premise that 'evil foreigners' shouldn't own hallowed Thai soil.

Of course the benefits of allowing foreigners into the market are kept quiet from Somchai the farmer and as such he must continue to tend to his rice paddies, borrowing money he can never repay using his land as collateral, until the fateful day comes when he loses his land to the rich landowners and moneylenders.

Viva la revolution.

That is 100 percent correct! I was waiting for somebody to figure it out!.

Edited June 19, 2009 by britainmal

[jboras]

All you guys that sold your prperties overseas and bought land and built houses for your Thai wives, just enjoy it while you can. Eventually you will loose it. 99% of cases will end up in separation. These girls are too smart now... All those 65+ pensioners that sell their assets overseas and buy land and house for their 20 year old Thai wife.... COME ON!

You would spend at least 5 million to get anything you would call home. You can use that same amount to rent a 4-5 star hotel room for 10 years.... and really enjoy yourselves... but then I suppose you wouldnt get a 20 tear old bride living in a hotel... you must pay the parents, the brothers, the sisters, the whole town, buy the land buld the house, have your EXPENSIVE wedding party for the whole town, then have just as an expensive party for your house party.... to enjoy that 20 year old flesh for a while...

So stop your complaining you know the laws... YOU CANT BUY ANYTHING.... if you do think of it as agift and it wont hurt when you walk away from it... which you will eventually...

Anyway... keep it up my friends and I really enjoy these wedding parties and house warming parties...

[Ga-gai]

All you guys that sold your prperties overseas and bought land and built houses for your Thai wives, just enjoy it while you can. Eventually you will loose it. 99% of cases will end up in separation. These girls are too smart now... All those 65+ pensioners that sell their assets overseas and buy land and house for their 20 year old Thai wife.... COME ON!

You would spend at least 5 million to get anything you would call home. You can use that same amount to rent a 4-5 star hotel room for 10 years.... and really enjoy yourselves... but then I suppose you wouldnt get a 20 tear old bride living in a hotel... you must pay the parents, the brothers, the sisters, the whole town, buy the land buld the house, have your EXPENSIVE wedding party for the whole town, then have just as an expensive party for your house party.... to enjoy that 20 year old flesh for a while...

So stop your complaining you know the laws... YOU CANT BUY ANYTHING.... if you do think of it as agift and it wont hurt when you walk away from it... which you will eventually...

Anyway... keep it up my friends and I really enjoy these wedding parties and house warming parties...

Hmm... That could be made as lyrics in a song!

Sadly but true. That's how some of the "fast-food" thai-farang relationships end up like. The guy either felt like a rock star among the bar-girls and then decided to pick pick one of them to become his "loving and caring" wife (and perhaps the mother of his children as well), or... he "bought" his wife from her parents by an arrangement through contacts where a sum of money would guarantee him to get an "innocent and unspoiled loving and caring wife" from the poor rural outskirts of this country. That guy think he's so smart and clever and got the whole world in his hand. The truth is that he's only fooling himself.

The ones that is made by arrangements, the poor guy many times gets weired women. More or less like buying a used car, which turns out to not be what you expected after a while. It's a great opportunity for that family to have their "hard to sell" daughter married to someone they also hope to have positive economical impact on the rest of the family. I heard from thais telling me that "that" family were so lucky to have their daughter merry a farang, because there were no thai male who wanted to have her. Maybe she was weired, had some kind of disorder, or just plain difficult to live with. I've seen many TF relationships and weddings during my years here and I can't stop being amazed on how little the well educated westerner really bother to know about the woman before banging the big drums. Either one or both are communicating on bad english and there is no way for the guy to get a sense of what kind of person he is getting involved with. All he know is how cute she is and the big plans he already have made up about the future, without asking or discussing it thoroughly with her. As if he had acquired a pet dog or something.

Ok... Some here would just say that I'm full of assumptions (again). But I'm not making up my stories I've put down in text here. Those are real events and experiences that I've actually seen and experiencing myself. Some readers may like or find it interesting and useful what I write. Some gets offended. But that's how the world is. I like living here. Like the people. But... I never seem to seize getting amazed on what's going on in the mind of the majority of the westerners that goes here. One day I'll maybe write a book about it. I have a lot of real characters that I can use for the story line.

Edited June 21, 2009 by Ga-gai

[Jimjim]

I have just been told of a lady in jomtien whos japanese boyfriend bought her a house a few years back, she has just gone to sell it and has been asked where she got the money from and they want proof, ill keep us posted,

Wow........real world vs. myth that is does not matter or will never be enforced......or just relax, nothing to worry about.

I think Trogers is right (earlier post): "...the issue will be like a Sword of Damocles hanging over our heads." (my changes)

They could, if they wanted to, take my house right now. And I would get nothing.......and my wife would get nothing. But they would certainly get something: a huge amount of negative and unwanted publicity.

Still, it is good that somebody in that department has come out and made a statement about this in an attempt to calm fears. I don't feel calm about the issue and won't until they remove the language from the law.

The language has always been there when that law came to pass, and it used to be worse before, your wife wouldn't have been able to own any land married to you. Just goes to show it's all about your attitude, focus on the negative, or be positive, it's your choice.

[bazmlb]

An Article supplied by one of our sponsors Siam Legal on Land ownership by a Thai when married to a foreigner.

http://www.thaivisa.com/ownership-of-land-...-foreigner.html

[Ga-gai]

"Normally, all property acquired by a husband and a wife after marriage is considered “marital property” or “community property” and would generally be shared equally between the husband and wife in the event of death or divorce. Gifts to one spouse, however, are deemed as the spouse’s “separate property.”

Correct me if I'm wrong...

This means that in a case of divorce, the husband is not legally entitled to half that house+land (or the value of it) since this is a separate gift to her which he therefore doesn't have any claims on. No loop holes in this law. She can throw you out and keep the house, no matter what.

Better be married to the right woman and be nice to her then!

Edited June 22, 2009 by Ga-gai

[Artisi]

An Article supplied by one of our sponsors Siam Legal on Land ownership by a Thai when married to a foreigner.

http://www.thaivisa.com/ownership-of-land-...-foreigner.html

Seems this sets out very clearly that it is really irrelevant where the money comes from when your wife buys land (provided it was obtained legally), as a foreigner married to a Thai you must sign a document saying you have no claim to the land - that's it - full stop.

This means if you "gift" the money to your spouse with which she in turn buys land you as the husband of a Thai are compeled sign to say you have no claim to it - that's means NO claim to the land however, any structure you have built on it might be a completely different story.

[billd766]

"Normally, all property acquired by a husband and a wife after marriage is considered “marital property” or “community property” and would generally be shared equally between the husband and wife in the event of death or divorce. Gifts to one spouse, however, are deemed as the spouse’s “separate property.”

Correct me if I'm wrong...

This means that in a case of divorce, the husband is not legally entitled to half that house+land (or the value of it) since this is a separate gift to her which he therefore doesn't have any claims on. No loop holes in this law. She can throw you out and keep the house, no matter what.

Better be married to the right woman and be nice to her then!

I am :D

[animatic]

I did, and I will continue to do so.

And the company owns the land,

so nothing to say about it.

[samgrowth]

Since the Thai govt is so short of money, they should confiscate all land held by proxy of Farang. Auction that off (to Mrs. Thaksin), and easily gain a few trillion Baht.

No need to get the mega loan anymore.

Edited June 22, 2009 by samgrowth

[Artisi]

Since the Thai govt is so short of money, they should confiscate all land held by proxy of Farang. Auction that off (to Mrs. Thaksin), and easily gain a few trillion Baht.

No need to get the mega loan anymore.

If it's held by proxy that is a different story to the one where the farang husband has compeletd the documentation to say he has NO CLAIM to the land- can't see why this is so hard to comprehend.

[Thai at Heart]

Since the Thai govt is so short of money, they should confiscate all land held by proxy of Farang. Auction that off (to Mrs. Thaksin), and easily gain a few trillion Baht.

No need to get the mega loan anymore.

Or conversely allow all with certain provisos (long term working, long term married, retired) to buy one rai and watch the cash roll in.