Undecided Buyers To Delay Property-Market: Thailand

[webfact]

PROPERTY

Undecided buyers to delay property-market

The Nation

The Greater Bangkok property market will not recover until the second half of this year as home-buyers are still hesitating and developers have to redesign their projects located in flood-prone areas.

"The floods last year are having a lingering effect on home-buyers' decision-making this year," Samma Kitsin, director-general of the Real Estate Information Centre (REIC), said yesterday.

But demand for homes in tourist destinations, especially Phuket, is still strong, according to a survey by the Agency for Real Estate Affairs (AREA).

Samma said most home-buyers considering projects in the capital and its suburbs are concerned about location.

Their target may change from single family homes or townhouses to condominiums at places that have never experienced flooding. Those neighbourhoods that escaped the floods will be their first choice.

Developers with land in flooded locations will have to revise their projects before introducing them to the market. That will take three to six months.

Developers who do not own land in flood-hit locations will not buy land close to those locations.

The property market in the first half will show stable or slight growth, but will recover in the second half after adjustments are made and the government comes out with a clear policy to manage floods, he said.

Last year, 340 residential projects were launched with 84,000 units, of which more than half or 44,000 units were condos and the remaining 40,000 units were low rises. The low rises were divided into 19,000 townhouses, 16,000 single family homes and 15,000 duplexes and shop houses.

REIC estimates that transfers of both new and resale residences in Greater Bangkok last year would reach only 135,000-140,000 units. That would be a drop of 21-24 per cent from 178,000 units in 2010.

Sopon Pornchokchai, president of AREA, said that although the Greater Bangkok market was soft, demand for vacation homes in resort areas like Phuket was robust, especially from foreign investors interested in owning a second home.

The company surveyed residential project launches in Phuket last year and found 114 projects with 6,216 units worth Bt91.41 billion. The average price was Bt14.7 million.

-- The Nation 2012-01-05

[w11guy]

Bangkok is already overwhelmed with unsold and empty condos. Every condo building I've been to in Silom/Sathorn area has LOTS of empty units for rent or sale. Many have been empty for well over a year. They can't be rented out and they can't be sold. There is a massive oversupply in the market.

Also, I just don't believe that property prices are stable, as these figures aren't based on reality. I know of a condo that has been on sale (and empty) for 1-2 years. It was originally priced at 5.4m but the price has just gone up to 5.7m. But if it can't be sold then what is it really worth? 4m? In the same unit, a farang who wanted a quick sale offered a 20% discount. WOW. So that's probably nearer the real value. I suspect that property price surveys are based on asking prices, so prices may look stable, but that's only because people won't lower their prices to realistic levels. Some economic turmoil could hammer the market and force some people to sell at greatly reduced prices

Edited January 5, 2012 by w11guy

[timewilltell]

"Sopon Pornchokchai, president of AREA, said that although the Greater Bangkok market was soft, demand for vacation homes in resort areas like Phuket was robust, especially from foreign investors interested in owning a second home."

"Director of the Land Department in Phuket states that every land purchase by a Thai (spouse) not having sufficient funds to purchase land with her own monies but doing so with monies received by her foreign companion violates and conflicts with the relevant laws of Thailand. It was also stated that the authorities may investigate and in the event that it is disclosed that land had been acquired in the described way the land title may be revoked at any time. Any legal structure ultimately designed to circumvent said laws such as nominee landholding through Thai citizens or use of Thai company’s being a vehicle to acquire (indirect but absolute) control over land may be deemed as illegal."

So you can't own it yourself, your wife can't buy it with your money, you can;t use a company to buy it and can't own the company anyway and leases are worthless because if you try to enforce when they are cancelled you get nothing back. How can foreign investors own a second home here? Foreign people with families here can't even buy a second home or are we just talking about a small percentage of condos that you CAN own here - maybe?

Where is the clarity?

[TomTao]

As I understand it, foreigners on a longstay visa, most likely non res 'O' or 'B' can puchase a condo or apartment, but we are not allowed to purchase land, it apears as though we cannot even provide the finance for our spouses to purchase land. Our hands are tied and we are funnelled into small areas if we wish to own a condo, or so it seams.

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[HaleySabai]

Bangkok is already overwhelmed with unsold and empty condos. Every condo building I've been to in Silom/Sathorn area has LOTS of empty units for rent or sale. Many have been empty for well over a year. They can't be rented out and they can't be sold. There is a massive oversupply in the market.

There is massive inventory in the Chiang Mai market and amazingly, the sellers just seem to be content to "sit" on the properties until the "magic" works for them. Meanwhile, the house sits through a few rainy seasons with bare maintenance,literally rotting under the sellers nose..... buyer beware!

[w11guy]

"Sopon Pornchokchai, president of AREA, said that although the Greater Bangkok market was soft, demand for vacation homes in resort areas like Phuket was robust, especially from foreign investors interested in owning a second home."

"Director of the Land Department in Phuket states that every land purchase by a Thai (spouse) not having sufficient funds to purchase land with her own monies but doing so with monies received by her foreign companion violates and conflicts with the relevant laws of Thailand. It was also stated that the authorities may investigate and in the event that it is disclosed that land had been acquired in the described way the land title may be revoked at any time. Any legal structure ultimately designed to circumvent said laws such as nominee landholding through Thai citizens or use of Thai company’s being a vehicle to acquire (indirect but absolute) control over land may be deemed as illegal."

So you can't own it yourself, your wife can't buy it with your money, you can;t use a company to buy it and can't own the company anyway and leases are worthless because if you try to enforce when they are cancelled you get nothing back. How can foreign investors own a second home here? Foreign people with families here can't even buy a second home or are we just talking about a small percentage of condos that you CAN own here - maybe?

Where is the clarity?

The law needs to be made much clearer. I think buying a condo in certain areas is the only thing that's ok. But if there are future problems in Thailand, would you be able to sell your condo and move your money out of the country?

Also seems like they want to make it difficult for women to own land.

Edited January 5, 2012 by w11guy

[Baerboxer]

As I understand it, foreigners on a longstay visa, most likely non res 'O' or 'B' can puchase a condo or apartment, but we are not allowed to purchase land, it apears as though we cannot even provide the finance for our spouses to purchase land. Our hands are tied and we are funnelled into small areas if we wish to own a condo, or so it seams.

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

I think you can give your wife funds to by land. However, this must be a gift i.e. you relinquish all rights to those funds, have no rights to claim them back, do not have any equity in the land. My wife bought a house several years ago. The land registery department, very professionally, took me into a seperate room and explained this. They wanted to make sure that I fully understood she was the only owner and all monies used in the purchase would be deemed hers. This was explained in excellent English in a helpful and careful manner. This house was bought directly from the builders of a large reasonably expensive estate. Several wives of farangs bought around the same time and the office wanted to be sure that everyone fully understood.

[arthurwait]

Bangkok is already overwhelmed with unsold and empty condos. Every condo building I've been to in Silom/Sathorn area has LOTS of empty units for rent or sale. Many have been empty for well over a year. They can't be rented out and they can't be sold. There is a massive oversupply in the market.

Also, I just don't believe that property prices are stable, as these figures aren't based on reality. I know of a condo that has been on sale (and empty) for 1-2 years. It was originally priced at 5.4m but the price has just gone up to 5.7m. But if it can't be sold then what is it really worth? 4m? In the same unit, a farang who wanted a quick sale offered a 20% discount. WOW. So that's probably nearer the real value. I suspect that property price surveys are based on asking prices, so prices may look stable, but that's only because people won't lower their prices to realistic levels. Some economic turmoil could hammer the market and force some people to sell at greatly reduced prices

Thais who invest in property look at it at a long term thing 10-20 years plus. Think how much the value of property has risen over the last 20-30 years. The country should still develop over the next 10-20 years and property prices rise at a higher rate than the western world. Most the rich Thai-Chinese got rich by this way. They look at it as an investment for their childrens future to live in, rent out, borrow against.

More and more kids are chosing the western option of living away from home as opposed staying with the family they won't be able to buy land in Bangkok where obviously the majority will work so they will have to buy or most likely rent condos. If you're willing to wait you will make money in the future.

High priced condos wont make a quick buck like people had got used to in the western world over the last decade or so, not when so many of the buyers were western who now don't have the money now.The developers have already taken the profit on them for the near future.

You're right people are having to take huge losses. One estate we looked at houses the ones on the sea front were 20MB that had already been sold, found one of them advertised secondhand for 11MB around 6 months later. They weren't the houses we were looking at.

Edited January 5, 2012 by arthurwait

[arthurwait]

.

Edited January 5, 2012 by arthurwait

[w11guy]

Bangkok is already overwhelmed with unsold and empty condos. Every condo building I've been to in Silom/Sathorn area has LOTS of empty units for rent or sale. Many have been empty for well over a year. They can't be rented out and they can't be sold. There is a massive oversupply in the market.

Also, I just don't believe that property prices are stable, as these figures aren't based on reality. I know of a condo that has been on sale (and empty) for 1-2 years. It was originally priced at 5.4m but the price has just gone up to 5.7m. But if it can't be sold then what is it really worth? 4m? In the same unit, a farang who wanted a quick sale offered a 20% discount. WOW. So that's probably nearer the real value. I suspect that property price surveys are based on asking prices, so prices may look stable, but that's only because people won't lower their prices to realistic levels. Some economic turmoil could hammer the market and force some people to sell at greatly reduced prices

Thais who invest in property look at it at a long term thing 10-20 years plus. Think how much the value of property has risen over the last 20-30 years. The country should still develop over the next 10-20 years and property prices rise at a higher rate than the western world. Most the rich Thai-Chinese got rich by this way. They look at it as an investment for their childrens future to live in, rent out, borrow against.

More and more kids are chosing the western option of living away from home as opposed staying with the family they won't be able to buy land in Bangkok where obviously the majority will work so they will have to buy or most likely rent condos. If you're willing to wait you will make money in the future.

High priced condos wont make a quick buck like people had got used to in the western world over the last decade or so, not when so many of the buyers were western who now don't have the money now.The developers have already taken the profit on them for the near future.

You're right people are having to take huge losses. One estate we looked at houses the ones on the sea front were 20MB that had already been sold, found one of them advertised secondhand for 11MB around 6 months later. They weren't the houses we were looking at.

I'm too old to wait. LOL. But I agree that property is usually good over the long term. But you you bought a property that was 20% overvalued now and then priced dropped another 20% over the next 5-10 years, then you'd be waiting a very long time for it to double in price just to get back to the price you bought at. Add into that the fact that many condo buildings that I've seen that are only around 10 years old don't seem in a very good state of repair. Would would want to buy a 20-30 year old condo? Ones that age are often in a dreadful state. If buying you need to try to get the property at a realistic value to begin with. Another problem is how do you actually sell. Some buildings have lots of condos for sale, so a big price drop may be needed if you want to sell in a hurry. The property market just seems far too risky for me. And often you can't even rent a property you own because there are so many others for rent in the same building. There just isn't enough demand to fill them all. I suppose one of the key things is to buy in popular and well-run building.

[Darrel]

No visa required to buy a farang-name condo.

Just some imported money.

[timewilltell]

Not much point in Thailand marketing itself as a great place to retire then, nor is it a great place to invest, nor is it a great place to bring up a family if the kids are going to be starting from behind because their parents could not buy real estate where all the other kids get the family inheritance. Not much fun bringing kids up in a condo!

Typical to pretend everything to get foreign investment and then try to cheat it away by moving the goalposts which you can hardly see because of the mist and the Thai referee keeps changing his tune everytime he opens his mouth. Crazy.

[w11guy]

Not much point in Thailand marketing itself as a great place to retire then, nor is it a great place to invest, nor is it a great place to bring up a family if the kids are going to be starting from behind because their parents could not buy real estate where all the other kids get the family inheritance. Not much fun bringing kids up in a condo!

Typical to pretend everything to get foreign investment and then try to cheat it away by moving the goalposts which you can hardly see because of the mist and the Thai referee keeps changing his tune everytime he opens his mouth. Crazy.

Most people inherit when they are much. much older than kids. I know Thai people in their 50s who haven't inherited anything, so they're not ahead of farang kids in that respect. But give a Thai wife money to buy a house in her name and the kids can inherit it.

If it's not good here for kids then live in a country that's better for kids. Simple.

I don't think Thailand government is pretending it's easy for foreigners to invest in property here. The laws are pretty explicit in saying that foreigners can't own land. It's the same in many countries around the world. At least we farangs can come to Thailand and live. Many Thais can't even get a tourist visa to USA & UK, so no hope of doing what we do.

Count yourself lucky that you're allowed to buy a condo here. You are in a very privileged position compared to most of the world's population. Thailand isn't meant to be some playground for farangs.

[timewilltell]

Not much point in Thailand marketing itself as a great place to retire then, nor is it a great place to invest, nor is it a great place to bring up a family if the kids are going to be starting from behind because their parents could not buy real estate where all the other kids get the family inheritance. Not much fun bringing kids up in a condo!

Typical to pretend everything to get foreign investment and then try to cheat it away by moving the goalposts which you can hardly see because of the mist and the Thai referee keeps changing his tune everytime he opens his mouth. Crazy.

Most people inherit when they are much. much older than kids. I know Thai people in their 50s who haven't inherited anything, so they're not ahead of farang kids in that respect. But give a Thai wife money to buy a house in her name and the kids can inherit it.

If it's not good here for kids then live in a country that's better for kids. Simple.

I don't think Thailand government is pretending it's easy for foreigners to invest in property here. The laws are pretty explicit in saying that foreigners can't own land. It's the same in many countries around the world. At least we farangs can come to Thailand and live. Many Thais can't even get a tourist visa to USA & UK, so no hope of doing what we do.

Count yourself lucky that you're allowed to buy a condo here. You are in a very privileged position compared to most of the world's population. Thailand isn't meant to be some playground for farangs.

Well maybe many Thais can't get a visa because they have not earned enough money to support themselves in the UK or US where there are social support systems that pay out to people who cannot support themselves. Thais who have adequate funds do not find it hard to get a visa and are free to do what they please in the UK and nearly all of Europe, Australia and America. They are not prevented from opening businesses, buying as much land as they please in their own name, prevented from giving their wife money for buying real estate or relentlessly hounded and investigated by officials for being foreign. Most of the other countries have a justice system that is fair, lawyers who are mostly not corrupt (though many are incompetent) and it is fairly easy and transparent to get residency. So maybe they should count themselves lucky.

I don't consider myself lucky to be able to buy a condo in order to raise my children to be honest and to be prevented from buying a home even in my spouse's name in order to bring them up even through some transparent residency or citizenship route which the Thais purposely delay despite the high cost. I appreciate you obviously feel different and that is fair enough.

Edited January 5, 2012 by timewilltell

[timewilltell]

Anyway the real point I was making is why do officials keep plugging Thailand as a place where foreign investment in buying second homes is welcome when they clearly do not want foreigners to invest in the property market?

[wpcoe]

When and where do "officials keep plugging Thailand as a place where foreign investment in buying second homes is welcome"?

[w11guy]

When and where do "officials keep plugging Thailand as a place where foreign investment in buying second homes is welcome"?

I was going to ask the same question. I've never heard anyone plugging Thailand as a place for buying second homes.

[w11guy]

Not much point in Thailand marketing itself as a great place to retire then, nor is it a great place to invest, nor is it a great place to bring up a family if the kids are going to be starting from behind because their parents could not buy real estate where all the other kids get the family inheritance. Not much fun bringing kids up in a condo!

Typical to pretend everything to get foreign investment and then try to cheat it away by moving the goalposts which you can hardly see because of the mist and the Thai referee keeps changing his tune everytime he opens his mouth. Crazy.

Most people inherit when they are much. much older than kids. I know Thai people in their 50s who haven't inherited anything, so they're not ahead of farang kids in that respect. But give a Thai wife money to buy a house in her name and the kids can inherit it.

If it's not good here for kids then live in a country that's better for kids. Simple.

I don't think Thailand government is pretending it's easy for foreigners to invest in property here. The laws are pretty explicit in saying that foreigners can't own land. It's the same in many countries around the world. At least we farangs can come to Thailand and live. Many Thais can't even get a tourist visa to USA & UK, so no hope of doing what we do.

Count yourself lucky that you're allowed to buy a condo here. You are in a very privileged position compared to most of the world's population. Thailand isn't meant to be some playground for farangs.

Well maybe many Thais can't get a visa because they have not earned enough money to support themselves in the UK or US where there are social support systems that pay out to people who cannot support themselves. Thais who have adequate funds do not find it hard to get a visa and are free to do what they please in the UK and nearly all of Europe, Australia and America. They are not prevented from opening businesses, buying as much land as they please in their own name, prevented from giving their wife money for buying real estate or relentlessly hounded and investigated by officials for being foreign. Most of the other countries have a justice system that is fair, lawyers who are mostly not corrupt (though many are incompetent) and it is fairly easy and transparent to get residency. So maybe they should count themselves lucky.

I don't consider myself lucky to be able to buy a condo in order to raise my children to be honest and to be prevented from buying a home even in my spouse's name in order to bring them up even through some transparent residency or citizenship route which the Thais purposely delay despite the high cost. I appreciate you obviously feel different and that is fair enough.

I can see your point of view and agree with some points made, but the fact is that USA immigration assumes that ALL Thai people applying for a visa will overstay and it is up to the applicant to prove otherwise. It's not true that if you are a rich Thai that it's easy. If you have money, but no job or family it can still be very difficult. As a UK or USA resident you just stroll on in - no questions asked. That is a major difference. If you are from USA you can jump on the next flight to Thailand. If you are a rich Thai, you still have to plan weeks or months in advance.

And it's not easy at all, even for rich Thais, to just stay in the USA or UK like we can stay in Thailand. Maybe I didn't explain myself properly, but there is a vast difference between how each is treated. But yes, if you can get a visa to live in UK or USA then you are free to buy land. But that's pretty meaningless to most Thais.

Anyway, if it's so bad here, then why are you still here? No offence meant, just wondering. So many people on TV complain about Thailand but they still stay. They think everywhere else is great but for some reason choose to live somewhere where they think almost everything is wrong.

Also, there is no law that says you can't give your Thai wife money to buy a house. So give her the money and let her buy one. What's stopping you? Or don't you trust her enough? Fair enough if you don't, but again, just wondering. You have lots of options but you seem to think you don't. I don't think the problem is that you can't but that you won't.

[timewilltell]

When and where do "officials keep plugging Thailand as a place where foreign investment in buying second homes is welcome"?

I was going to ask the same question. I've never heard anyone plugging Thailand as a place for buying second homes.

Well read the second to last paragraph and imagine you have never been to Thailand nor know anything about the land laws here. What would that sentence mean to you?

Yes buying land in the US or UK is meaningless to most Thais just as it is meaningless for most of the population of the UK or USA - most people don't have that sort of spare cash. For Thais though if you had a stable income and had been in the country (UK or US) you could almost certainly borrow money without stumping up the whole amount AND have it in your name too and that certainly rebalances a lot because you certainly can;t do that here.

I am not bashing Thailand. It is a great place for many reasons but some things are downright wrong. It is fine to have law that is clear and everyone understands - that is not how it is though and no public figure, embassy or major media outlet ever seems to really say you cannot buy property here. You can buy - a condo maybe or maybe not - land under lease maybe or maybe not - land through a company maybe or maybe not - it is all so woolly and unclear yet affects the most major assets of people.

You have probably put some of your assets in your wife's name and it is all working out fine for you - for many others it doesn't and it is not just a few million baht of spare cash lost, it is often the whole families assets and the future of the children affected, schooling, lifestyle, living conditions, social spending and often under threat of bodily harm causing the remaining family to move from pillar to post with all the costs involved as well as the emotional upheaval. That because it is often organised crime that targets foreigners with property - easy pickings for unscrupulous people and a grossly biased and bribable judicial ssystem. I do not think a country should have a policy that encourages the dismemberment of a family.

Just because I complain of some things in Thailand does not mean I do not like it here, nor that I do not want to stay here but does that mean I cannot express a view that some things are wrong and should be amended,clarified properly or put to right? It is not all bad but it is WAY too restrictive and potentially ultimately catastrophic to a family.

I don't think everything is wrong here but I do think Thailand should come clean. I think it should publicise properly what people can and cannot have and that there should be systems in place to properly protect assets. The laws actually allow a foreigner to start a business with a 49% ownership and also for that company to buy land except Thais don't like that much so come out with excuses for why the law is wrong and put in place procedures to encourage the law to be twisted to suit their nationalistic viewpoint - not the legal one, just their idea of what the law should be but actually isn't. Why not just put the law right? Be clear and stop allowing people to lose millions of assets and especially stop making comments that actively encourage people to come and buy second homes when it is clearly not what the Thais want. Read that second to last paragraph - he is a Thai person right - and he is in a position of influence isn't he?

I would prefer a law that provides properly for 90 year leases or maybe a limited landowning right of say 1 rai or something under some conditions and prohibit foreigners from having any shares at all in companies that own land. That is in reality what they want but why not establish the law properly. It is all smoke and mirrors, comments about what the law means according to how nationalistic the speaker is or what their particular benefit might be. For years we have heard leases for 30 years are acceptable yet Thai officials do not support it in the courts or elsewhere. So if that is not OK what is OK - ten years maybe, five, twenty. No one has a clue. Companies the same issue - what percentage of a company can a foreigner own if the company owns land, can he loan money and secure it on a company owning land etc. etc. It is all basically about being able to secure money brought into the country against theft or misappropriation yet the law and officials seem to actively obscure the reality in order maybe to keep the money flowing. What would happen if all foreign investment in leases or companies stopped overnight. That is really what should happen because there shouldn't be any investment of that sort. What gets me is people in high places never say exactly that - it is all obscured and misleads people to do what they think they are allowed to do by law, what he lawyers say they can do, yet which the justice system in no way supports. There are dozens of examples.

I want to see some clarity brought to the problem - if it was really clear we would not have all the thousands of posts on the issue and a lot of foreigners would not have lost their life savings.

Is that a bad thing to ask for? Why not just make the law clear?

Or is it that by doing that it would be bad for Thailand and <deleted> to the foreigner and his family who might get stuffed. THAT is not acceptable!!

I do appreciate that you can avoid it all by just renting or buying a condo and squeezing yourself in their with your wife and kids. But really that is not the point as people are led to believe one thing by the smiling face of Thailand while the reality is something wholly different. And it is a big thing they are disguising. Sorry post too long.

[timewilltell]

I post and two minutes later here is another example.

Please read the link and tell me the Phuket Governor is not advocating foreigners buying houses.

It is just not on!!

http://www.phuketgazette.net/archives/articles/2012/article11912.html

[Darrel]

Please read the link and tell me the Phuket Governor is not advocating foreigners buying houses.

I would say he is mostly interested in much bigger fish:

"The typical foreign investor is from Russia, Scandinavia or the Middle East and invests from 150 million to 200mn baht to acquire a hotel property with 150 rooms or more. They often improve resort properties and sell them on to other foreigners, he said."

And as far as I know there is no doubt at all that in the way of property farangs can buy farang-quota condos only, if they want their sole name on the freehold title. Anything else will involve dubious company or lease schemes which, in the end, never allow a farang to own land.

Though as you say, they could be much clearer about it.

What bothers me is that whilst at the moment they are happy to keep quiet and let farangs buy these semi-legal company structures, one day when they no longer want/need the farang money they will turn round and say "all this is illegal, it's always been illegal, and now we're going to confiscate it". And they will be entirely correct and acting in full legality.

The same applies to retirement visa extensions. Today they want us our money and getting an extension is absurdly easy and cheap. Tomorrow may be another story entirely.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Darrel

[Chua]

Notably, not all of Thailand was affected by the floods at the end of 2011. Also, not all areas of Thailand have a property glut. For example, Koh Samui is currently seeing a real estate boom, not only in condos, but also in high-end luxury properties > $1 MM USD.

[w11guy]

When and where do "officials keep plugging Thailand as a place where foreign investment in buying second homes is welcome"?

I was going to ask the same question. I've never heard anyone plugging Thailand as a place for buying second homes.

Well read the second to last paragraph and imagine you have never been to Thailand nor know anything about the land laws here. What would that sentence mean to you?

Yes buying land in the US or UK is meaningless to most Thais just as it is meaningless for most of the population of the UK or USA - most people don't have that sort of spare cash. For Thais though if you had a stable income and had been in the country (UK or US) you could almost certainly borrow money without stumping up the whole amount AND have it in your name too and that certainly rebalances a lot because you certainly can;t do that here.

I am not bashing Thailand. It is a great place for many reasons but some things are downright wrong. It is fine to have law that is clear and everyone understands - that is not how it is though and no public figure, embassy or major media outlet ever seems to really say you cannot buy property here. You can buy - a condo maybe or maybe not - land under lease maybe or maybe not - land through a company maybe or maybe not - it is all so woolly and unclear yet affects the most major assets of people.

You have probably put some of your assets in your wife's name and it is all working out fine for you - for many others it doesn't and it is not just a few million baht of spare cash lost, it is often the whole families assets and the future of the children affected, schooling, lifestyle, living conditions, social spending and often under threat of bodily harm causing the remaining family to move from pillar to post with all the costs involved as well as the emotional upheaval. That because it is often organised crime that targets foreigners with property - easy pickings for unscrupulous people and a grossly biased and bribable judicial ssystem. I do not think a country should have a policy that encourages the dismemberment of a family.

Just because I complain of some things in Thailand does not mean I do not like it here, nor that I do not want to stay here but does that mean I cannot express a view that some things are wrong and should be amended,clarified properly or put to right? It is not all bad but it is WAY too restrictive and potentially ultimately catastrophic to a family.

I don't think everything is wrong here but I do think Thailand should come clean. I think it should publicise properly what people can and cannot have and that there should be systems in place to properly protect assets. The laws actually allow a foreigner to start a business with a 49% ownership and also for that company to buy land except Thais don't like that much so come out with excuses for why the law is wrong and put in place procedures to encourage the law to be twisted to suit their nationalistic viewpoint - not the legal one, just their idea of what the law should be but actually isn't. Why not just put the law right? Be clear and stop allowing people to lose millions of assets and especially stop making comments that actively encourage people to come and buy second homes when it is clearly not what the Thais want. Read that second to last paragraph - he is a Thai person right - and he is in a position of influence isn't he?

I would prefer a law that provides properly for 90 year leases or maybe a limited landowning right of say 1 rai or something under some conditions and prohibit foreigners from having any shares at all in companies that own land. That is in reality what they want but why not establish the law properly. It is all smoke and mirrors, comments about what the law means according to how nationalistic the speaker is or what their particular benefit might be. For years we have heard leases for 30 years are acceptable yet Thai officials do not support it in the courts or elsewhere. So if that is not OK what is OK - ten years maybe, five, twenty. No one has a clue. Companies the same issue - what percentage of a company can a foreigner own if the company owns land, can he loan money and secure it on a company owning land etc. etc. It is all basically about being able to secure money brought into the country against theft or misappropriation yet the law and officials seem to actively obscure the reality in order maybe to keep the money flowing. What would happen if all foreign investment in leases or companies stopped overnight. That is really what should happen because there shouldn't be any investment of that sort. What gets me is people in high places never say exactly that - it is all obscured and misleads people to do what they think they are allowed to do by law, what he lawyers say they can do, yet which the justice system in no way supports. There are dozens of examples.

I want to see some clarity brought to the problem - if it was really clear we would not have all the thousands of posts on the issue and a lot of foreigners would not have lost their life savings.

Is that a bad thing to ask for? Why not just make the law clear?

Or is it that by doing that it would be bad for Thailand and <deleted> to the foreigner and his family who might get stuffed. THAT is not acceptable!!

I do appreciate that you can avoid it all by just renting or buying a condo and squeezing yourself in their with your wife and kids. But really that is not the point as people are led to believe one thing by the smiling face of Thailand while the reality is something wholly different. And it is a big thing they are disguising. Sorry post too long.

Ok, I see where you're at now and agree with almost everything you say. Just for the record, I live in Thailand and live with my gf in a rented condo. I would never buy a house here because it's just too risky. I might buy a condo at some point but I'm not really comfortable with that either. The reason being that I am a city person and would only buy in BKK. If I bought and later needed to sell then I think it would be almost impossible without dropping the price drastically.

But Thailand is a poor country and I don't think foreigners should be allowed to buy up any amount of land. If that was allowed then foreigners would buy up all the good land. But, like you stay, maybe a law that foreigners married to Thais can buy limited amounts of land for person use (not speculation) would be ok. But whatever Thailand decides, it should be made crystal clear. But another problem is that people always find ways around laws.

Edited January 6, 2012 by w11guy

[thaiwanderer]

If you don't like, don't play?

Thailand (like every country) markets itself as many things it isn't (or more correctly government agencies with political aims and separately private businesses with commercial aims).

The laws are crystal clear, enforcement is patchy.

Getting rid of risk and lack of certainty while breaking the law is hardly something good for Thailand, or any other country.

[noitom]

There virtually is no secondary market in Bangkok. Wealthier Thais buy condos as investment. The sales pitches for years featured "guarantees" of rental income for two years , a return of 8%. This looks very good when there is no real estate tax and Thais invest virtually nothing in maintenance and repair, improvements..etc. They sit there idle, and once in a while, they catch a fish and a naive foreigner comes along with the two months or maybe three security, and they don't care if he walks- They are happy with a few months of kept security deposit once a year or two. Can you imagine the squatters in a lot of those dark buildings around CBD and as far as the eye can see?

The real estate evaluation is preposterous. Consider the "infrastructure" for example, from Ploenchit all the way to OnNut along Sukhumvit where the spaghetti wire electric is almost dangling on the street and below eye level most of the way. Tied up in knots and balls of wire nailed to falling over, leaning poles of wood. Can you imaging the sewer system infrastructure? That combined with no sidewalks, limited security, no maintenance contracts with service personnel most of whom don't speak English. Traffic snarls and bottlenecks bumper to bumper most of the day and evening add to the tremendous value of Bangkok real estate. Just being facetious.

[w11guy]

There virtually is no secondary market in Bangkok. Wealthier Thais buy condos as investment. The sales pitches for years featured "guarantees" of rental income for two years , a return of 8%. This looks very good when there is no real estate tax and Thais invest virtually nothing in maintenance and repair, improvements..etc. They sit there idle, and once in a while, they catch a fish and a naive foreigner comes along with the two months or maybe three security, and they don't care if he walks- They are happy with a few months of kept security deposit once a year or two. Can you imagine the squatters in a lot of those dark buildings around CBD and as far as the eye can see?

The real estate evaluation is preposterous. Consider the "infrastructure" for example, from Ploenchit all the way to OnNut along Sukhumvit where the spaghetti wire electric is almost dangling on the street and below eye level most of the way. Tied up in knots and balls of wire nailed to falling over, leaning poles of wood. Can you imaging the sewer system infrastructure? That combined with no sidewalks, limited security, no maintenance contracts with service personnel most of whom don't speak English. Traffic snarls and bottlenecks bumper to bumper most of the day and evening add to the tremendous value of Bangkok real estate. Just being facetious.

The first part of your post is quite sensible, but then it gets quite ridiculous. Security at most condo buildings is good an I don't know of any buildings that have squatters. Infrastructure is not the best but it's not great in lots of cities around the world. There are plenty of sidewalks, especially where you say there aren't any. Service personnel don't speak English - well that's a big surprise seeing as we're in Thailand. Did you also know that service personnel in the UK and USA don't speak Thai. Shocking isn't it?

It's also not true that Thais do not repair and maintain their properties. The rental properties I've lived in have been newly renovated. And the last condo building I lived in was closed down completely for a major renovation.

Perhaps you should have ended your post after the first few sentences.

And don't forget that Thailand, including Bangkok, is still developing. I don't know why so many on here expect everything to be perfect. Look back 50 years at London and New York and they had lots of problems and still do.

Edited January 10, 2012 by w11guy

[Langsuan Man]

Director of the Land Department in Phuket states that every land purchase by a Thai (spouse) not having sufficient funds to purchase land with her own monies but doing so with monies received by her foreign companion violates and conflicts with the relevant laws of Thailand. It was also stated that the authorities may investigate and in the event that it is disclosed that land had been acquired in the described way the land title may be revoked at any time. Any legal structure ultimately designed to circumvent said laws such as nominee landholding through Thai citizens or use of Thai company’s being a vehicle to acquire (indirect but absolute) control over land may be deemed as illegal."

It appears that this particular individual is the only Land Department "Director" that has historically made these kinds of statements so I would take anything that he says with a huge grain of salt and would emphasize: may be deemed as illegal

[w11guy]

Director of the Land Department in Phuket states that every land purchase by a Thai (spouse) not having sufficient funds to purchase land with her own monies but doing so with monies received by her foreign companion violates and conflicts with the relevant laws of Thailand. It was also stated that the authorities may investigate and in the event that it is disclosed that land had been acquired in the described way the land title may be revoked at any time. Any legal structure ultimately designed to circumvent said laws such as nominee landholding through Thai citizens or use of Thai company’s being a vehicle to acquire (indirect but absolute) control over land may be deemed as illegal."

It appears that this particular individual is the only Land Department "Director" that has historically made these kinds of statements so I would take anything that he says with a huge grain of salt and would emphasize: may be deemed as illegal

It seems he is talking about foreigners owning land via a Thai. Maybe something was lost in translation, but if you give a woman 5m baht, then surely she is free to buy a property if she wants.