Crackdown On Land Owned By Foreign Residents

[Reasonableman]

Jayman: Fair enough. Few of us know all the ins and outs. But we do want to. There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings and wrong information & rumors going around, and it would be a real service to all expats if an authoritative legal beagle were able to answer our various concerns and clarify the law. Perhaps a new group on TV, or does one already exist?

Edited March 13, 2012 by Reasonableman

[Jayman]

Jayman: Fair enough. Few of us know all the ins and outs. But we do want to. There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings and wrong information & rumors going around, and it would be a real service to all expats if an authoritative legal beagle were able to answer our various concerns and clarify the law. Perhaps a new group on TV, or does one already exist?

I too wish there was a place we expats could get true legal info that holds up in a court of law. But knowing that TIT and things change from a case by case all we can do is share our 1st hand experiences and hope to learn from each other.

I wasn't trying to insult you but rather understand if you had first hand experience or were just speculating.

[Reasonableman]

No problem. We are all doing the best we can in a difficult situation. I hope your arrangements work for you, I sincerely do. I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children. A reasonably sized residential block, say .5-1 hectare, or even less, but certainly not a 1000 hectare ranch. Would this be a major security threat to the Thai people? I think not.

Jayman: Fair enough. Few of us know all the ins and outs. But we do want to. There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings and wrong information & rumors going around, and it would be a real service to all expats if an authoritative legal beagle were able to answer our various concerns and clarify the law. Perhaps a new group on TV, or does one already exist?

I too wish there was a place we expats could get true legal info that holds up in a court of law. But knowing that TIT and things change from a case by case all we can do is share our 1st hand experiences and hope to learn from each other.

I wasn't trying to insult you but rather understand if you had first hand experience or were just speculating.

[swisstouristpattaya]

it s illegal to give money to lady to buy land.it s a fact.if they found it,u got no recourse and you are deportable.....

you have 0 right here in the los.

[Tanaka]

Another bullshit story. We are not allowed to own land so all the land 'owned by foreigners' is actually owned by Thais, be it nominees or people like jay and me. The Thais still own it.

The Amity Treaty enables American citizens to own up to 1 rai of land. It has not been modified or annulled to date.

Read the treaty again. Some professions are excluded and so is land ownership. Except if you own a foreign company that wants to build a home for you. But you will still not own the land.

I wonder how this would effect those of us that are married to thais with children and own our primary residence that is obviously in the name of the Thai spouse. Certainly if all the paperwork was done and filed correctly then no laws were broken right? No intention to break or circumvent any laws either.

Your residence is on land that is owned by your wife? And you still claim you are the owner?

[RogueLeader]

I said sorry if this "might" have happened to you. I don't assume anything including that you know what you are talking about. You now state that you have no first hand knowledge abut what you are talking about but rather what you have seen with your eyes walking around thailand.

Ok. Well just cause some poster on TV prints something doesn't make it so. I am more interested in what the law says and even more so in 1st hand experience in a given situation. All the air chair experts can spread whatever observations they want but unless they are a thai lawyer or experienced it first hand I will not give too much weight to what they are saying.

If you're as secure in your family as you seem to be, you have no problems. If you're not, Thai law will absolutely not protect you, as a foreigner, in a dispute with a Thai. That is a fact. It's not the ravings of a bitter, ripped-off man or the speculations of someone with a grudge against Thai people. Thai lawsuits are settled on a patriotic basis. I know a lot of expats in Thailand. A lot. Many of them have stories that bear this. All of them know many others with similar stories.

I visit Thailand (I've spent a *lot* of time in Thailand and I know Bangkok better than I know London) but I am not arrogant enough to believe that however proficient I become with the Thai language, or however much I know about Thai culture, both ancient and modern, I will ever be anything more than a tourist. I visit, I enjoy the country for what it is and I leave. It suits me and it suits the people of Thailand. everyone knows where they stand.

I don't have to be bitten by a snake to know that it's not a good thing. A lawyer will tell you what you want to hear as long as you're paying. A fellow expat will sing the praises of Thailand, and it is a beautiful, exotic place. But it isn't Europe with sun, sex and cheap beer. Business ethics are different. Law is different.

Perhaps you should read the laws for yourself?

Edited March 13, 2012 by RogueLeader

[Jayman]

Another bullshit story. We are not allowed to own land so all the land 'owned by foreigners' is actually owned by Thais, be it nominees or people like jay and me. The Thais still own it.

The Amity Treaty enables American citizens to own up to 1 rai of land. It has not been modified or annulled to date.

Read the treaty again. Some professions are excluded and so is land ownership. Except if you own a foreign company that wants to build a home for you. But you will still not own the land.

I wonder how this would effect those of us that are married to thais with children and own our primary residence that is obviously in the name of the Thai spouse. Certainly if all the paperwork was done and filed correctly then no laws were broken right? No intention to break or circumvent any laws either.

Your residence is on land that is owned by your wife? And you still claim you are the owner?

I claim my family owns it not me. I signed paperwork stating that my wife bought the land and house with her money and I have no claim to it other than the lease I hold. My question is about if the government can take the land from my wife.. not me. I never claimed to own it.

[gemini81]

Another bullshit story. We are not allowed to own land so all the land 'owned by foreigners' is actually owned by Thais, be it nominees or people like jay and me. The Thais still own it.

Additionally, when we pass away, it returns into the hands of thai nationals.

It is not in violation to have the land in a spouse's name. I don't see a problem here. Go after the millions of rai sold by nationals in which the land has no N.S. 3 or chanote (which, by law, with neither of these is to not be sold outside of one's family as the gov't can take it back).

With the above article, with the cases of a business and only 49% foreign ownership, I don't see how foreigners are the main or primary owner anyhow. This just discourages investors all the further anyway, having no ownership or assets to land, or even to be used for collateral. Key investors like Japan and others may just look elsewhere.

Edited March 13, 2012 by gemini81

[Nisa]

I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

Again there is nothing preventing a farang from marrying a Thai and raising a family in a house that is passed on to the Thai kids. If proper preparation is made, even if the wife dies, there is no reason the husband has to leave the house or are the kids out of luck when it comes to inheriting the house.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Nisa

[12DrinkMore]

while Thailand invests it in Mercedes-Benz's, Swiss watches and smart London apartments.

Come on, you forgot the iPADs and iPhones.

[transam]

Near 30,000 views in a day. . Breaking News, Deodorant sales boom today.

[12DrinkMore]

No problem. We are all doing the best we can in a difficult situation. I hope your arrangements work for you, I sincerely do. I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children. A reasonably sized residential block, say .5-1 hectare, or even less, but certainly not a 1000 hectare ranch. Would this be a major security threat to the Thai people? I think not.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

In fifteen years I have met two westerners (and they had to accept Thai names, how quaint?), and around 3 or so claiming to have "Permanent Residence".

The Sikhs seem to have also managed to find some fast track, but I'm not sure of the history here.

[Reasonableman]

Thanks, Nisa, but that response doesn't resolve the issue for me. But I believe you are only trying to be logical and realistic. Differences in background and philosophy I guess. Everything changes, including the status quo. ;-)

I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

Again there is nothing preventing a farang from marrying a Thai and raising a family in a house that is passed on to the Thai kids. If proper preparation is made, even if the wife dies, there is no reason the husband has to leave the house or are the kids out of luck when it comes to inheriting the house.

[Nisa]

This just discourages investors all the further anyway, having no ownership or assets to land, or even to be used for collateral. Key investors like Japan and others may just look elsewhere.

That is a part of the exact reason for this law ... to keep prices from becoming so ridiculously high that only very rich Thais can enjoy home ownership. Countries such as Singapore, who also don't allow foreigners to own land, do just fine in terms of investment into the country. What you are not getting is that Thailand doesn't want foreign individuals owning land and they prefer to have Japanese look elsewhere if they want to buy up land. The Thai government's priority is in protecting Thais and Thailand and not catering to foreigners who want to buy land here because it is cheaper than their home country resulting in prices rising to the levels of those in their home country.

[Reasonableman]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

This just discourages investors all the further anyway, having no ownership or assets to land, or even to be used for collateral. Key investors like Japan and others may just look elsewhere.

That is a part of the exact reason for this law ... to keep prices from becoming so ridiculously high that only very rich Thais can enjoy home ownership. Countries such as Singapore, who also don't allow foreigners to own land, do just fine in terms of investment into the country. What you are not getting is that Thailand doesn't want foreign individuals owning land and they prefer to have Japanese look elsewhere if they want to buy up land. The Thai government's priority is in protecting Thais and Thailand and not catering to foreigners who want to buy land here because it is cheaper than their home country resulting in prices rising to the levels of those in their home country.

[soundman]

Profanity post removed from view. Pls. keep it clean gents.

[soundman]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

Mainly politicians, and large families with political connections.

[Nisa]

I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

Again there is nothing preventing a farang from marrying a Thai and raising a family in a house that is passed on to the Thai kids. If proper preparation is made, even if the wife dies, there is no reason the husband has to leave the house or are the kids out of luck when it comes to inheriting the house.

Thanks, Nisa, but that response doesn't resolve the issue for me. But I believe you are only trying to be logical and realistic. Differences in background and philosophy I guess. Everything changes, including the status quo. ;-)

It may not fly for you but I am simply trying to point out that many things you are saying are incorrect and you are arguing against something (to people who cannot change the laws) based on false assumptions.

The bottom line is foreigners are restricted from owning land in Thailand and this is not an uncommon practice of countries. In fact, countries who don't have such laws often complain and worry over foreigners owning too much of the land in their country.

I certainly wish I could buy land in my name here but then again I wish I could take a dump on the sidewalk when I felt like going but the bottom line is we live in a world with laws and those laws are generally for the greater good. In this case we are talking about a Law in Thailand which is a country the vast majority of us posting here are not citizens and don't have a say in electing those who make the laws. The first thing one needs to do if they plan to stay here long terms is accept they are not a citizen of Thailand and need to accept the laws of this country and if they can't, they should find a place more suitable to live.

[Tatsujin]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

The rich Thai's/Thai-Chinese of course . . . the same ones that own everything and don't want any competition to their multitude of ways to screw over the little people.

[Jayman]

No problem. We are all doing the best we can in a difficult situation. I hope your arrangements work for you, I sincerely do. I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children. A reasonably sized residential block, say .5-1 hectare, or even less, but certainly not a 1000 hectare ranch. Would this be a major security threat to the Thai people? I think not.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

In fifteen years I have met two westerners (and they had to accept Thai names, how quaint?), and around 3 or so claiming to have "Permanent Residence".

The Sikhs seem to have also managed to find some fast track, but I'm not sure of the history here.

Had to accept Thai names? Please elaborate... Did they have to translate their birth names into Thai script cause Thai script is the official written language here or did some immigration official make up new "thai" sounding names for them? My thai born children have names like Michael and Joseph but they written in Thai script on their birth certificate but they still say Michael and Joseph. Also, my name has been translated into Thai script for my yellow as was book as was both my parents names that are also listed as my parents in the yellow book but these are not "thai" names.

[Nisa]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

Mainly politicians, and large families with political connections.

I wonder how many of these farmers owned their land pre-Thaksin government loan programs ... but that is a question for another topic.

Edit: Actually I am wondering if this number is actually encouraging. My guess is that in most developed nations the vast majority of farmland is now owned by corporations. The days of mom and pops farms is gone and Thailand still having 41% of farmers still owning their own land is kind of surprising given how hard it is everywhere else to compete against the big when it comes to most things but especially farming.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Nisa

[oldsailor35]

What about all of the Chinese who own everything else and pretty much run the place? Or are they "foreigners" too?

These people are probably the root of the problem. Here there are many Chinese Thais in powerful positions and they want to keep it for themselves.

[Nisa]

No problem. We are all doing the best we can in a difficult situation. I hope your arrangements work for you, I sincerely do. I still feel that some categories of foreigners, who are long-term permanent residents of good character and standing, with Thai families, but not yet with Thai citizenship, should be allowed to buy enough land legally, in their own names, to live on and raise their Thai families, and pass on to their children. A reasonably sized residential block, say .5-1 hectare, or even less, but certainly not a 1000 hectare ranch. Would this be a major security threat to the Thai people? I think not.

Who is it you believe is on track to become a Thai Citizen? How many westerners have you met that have become a Thai Citizen? My guess is zero.

In fifteen years I have met two westerners (and they had to accept Thai names, how quaint?), and around 3 or so claiming to have "Permanent Residence".

The Sikhs seem to have also managed to find some fast track, but I'm not sure of the history here.

Had to accept Thai names? Please elaborate... Did they have to translate their birth names into Thai script cause Thai script is the official written language here or did some immigration official make up new "thai" sounding names for them? My thai born children have names like Michael and Joseph but they written in Thai script on their birth certificate but they still say Michael and Joseph. Also, my name has been translated into Thai script for my yellow as was book as was both my parents names that are also listed as my parents in the yellow book but these are not "thai" names.

My Thai wife took my last name and although I certainly haven't changed my name, it was translated to Thai on the marriage documents.

12drink - do you believe those who said they had Thai Citizenship? I believe it is possible but I personally (or 3rd hand) have never heard of anyone doing it but also have heard it is easier for a foreign female to become a Thai citizen if they marry a Thai man but then again it is not like this is all that common either ... at least when it comes to farang women.

[Khun Jean]

Whoa. Steady. You've assumed a lot of things there. It hasn't happened to me. I've never had any sort of sexual relationship with any Thai woman and I'm not especially interested in doing so. But every time I'm in Thailand I look around me with eyes unclouded by lust and uncoloured by bitterness towards women, either Thai or Western and I see, almost without exception, men being stung. if you're one of the ones who managed to do it well and properly (and I know a few of them) and you and you aren't partly a farang ATM, then well done. But when you say:

She clearly owns the land but cannot go selling it while I hold a lease on the land

You are just factually wrong. She can sell it. Obviously you're very secure in your situation and this isn't a problem for you, but you need to be aware that this simply is not true. You've clearly been in Thailand for some time and are no mug, so you know that your wife fully expects you to take financial care of her and to a certain extent, her extended family for the rest of her life. It's the biggest mistake that most expats make, the meaning of 'I love you'.

So if they bank is listed on the land deed as the lien holder it CANNOT be sold but if a farang is listed on the land deed as the lien holder it can?

Ok.. if you say so.

This is were most people make the wrong assumption.

All contracts between wife and husband are unenforceable and when married have to be dissolved. It is just the law so no grey areas here.

If you are secure about your relationship then why the lease?

If it is for when something unfortunate happens to your wife that you can still live there than a usufruct is actually better because you don't have to pay taxes and it can be for live.

If the bank is listed then the bank is a 'third party' without influence what will be sin somros and sin suan tua.

Those two categories 'sin somros' and 'sin suan tua' should be understood very well because everything financial and about ownerships are based on that when you are married.

http://www.attorneythai.com/pdf/015.pdf

[soundman]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

Mainly politicians, and large families with political connections.

I wonder how many of these farmers owned their land pre-Thaksin government loan programs ... but that is a question for another topic.

Edit: Actually I am wondering if this number is actually encouraging. My guess is that in most developed nations the vast majority of farmland is now owned by corporations. The days of mom and pops farms is gone and Thailand still having 41% of farmers still owning their own land is kind of surprising given how hard it is everywhere else to compete against the big when it comes to most things but especially farming.

Not sure of any national figures, however in the district where I reside in the last 10 years, large tracts of farmland have been gobbled up by:

1. Factory zones - equivalent to maybe a 700 - 1000 Rai - Much used for BOI (100% foreign) sold to foreign companies at ridiculously inflated prices.
   
2. BOI (100% foreign) AG companies - approx. 3000 Rai.
   
3. Thai owned Ag companies, and their sub-contractors - more than 20,000 Rai.
   
4. Pottaman Damapong - in excess of 5000 Rai. (Rumoured to be payment for money lent to prospective MP's election campaigns.)
   

[Reasonableman]

Still don't see how allowing permanent residents to own a block of land is a bad idea.

[oldsailor35]

As a rule, I try to keep out of politics in my host country of 20 years, but here is an issue that requires action.

I believe it is time for us Thaivisa readers/contributors to lobby political representatives in our various homelands for a cause about which many of us feel passionate.

The cause is reciprocal rights for property ownership. If a Thai may own property, to a reasonable extent, in our homeland, then we expect the same right in Thailand.

Write to your political representatives in your various homelands to address this huge injustice. Ambassadors, Bundestag delegates, MP's, etc, but really.... this is quite unacceptable.

I am not talking about the right to buy 1000 rai of prime farmland, but at least the right to own a personal residential property in one's own name, especially if a Thai family is involved

I am quite certain that this cause will gain traction if enough TV readers spend 20 minutes doing what NEEDS to be done.

Great idea and better than doing nothing. Maybe we cab get a standard well worded letter with spaces to fill in the gaps. TV members from various countries can translate and we all send it email and snail mail to our embassy and to the appropriate MP's back home. Any further ideas? This should be done simply to try and establish fair reciprocal agreemants. In London/UK, anybody can buy anything. Can we own land in the Middle East/Parts of Asia etc, no.

This is a good idea, surely there is someone out there who could draft a standard letter which we can send to our appropriate MP's or persons of position in our countries.

[Jayman]

Whoa. Steady. You've assumed a lot of things there. It hasn't happened to me. I've never had any sort of sexual relationship with any Thai woman and I'm not especially interested in doing so. But every time I'm in Thailand I look around me with eyes unclouded by lust and uncoloured by bitterness towards women, either Thai or Western and I see, almost without exception, men being stung. if you're one of the ones who managed to do it well and properly (and I know a few of them) and you and you aren't partly a farang ATM, then well done. But when you say:

She clearly owns the land but cannot go selling it while I hold a lease on the land

You are just factually wrong. She can sell it. Obviously you're very secure in your situation and this isn't a problem for you, but you need to be aware that this simply is not true. You've clearly been in Thailand for some time and are no mug, so you know that your wife fully expects you to take financial care of her and to a certain extent, her extended family for the rest of her life. It's the biggest mistake that most expats make, the meaning of 'I love you'.

So if they bank is listed on the land deed as the lien holder it CANNOT be sold but if a farang is listed on the land deed as the lien holder it can?

Ok.. if you say so.

This is were most people make the wrong assumption.

All contracts between wife and husband are unenforceable and when married have to be dissolved. It is just the law so no grey areas here.

If you are secure about your relationship then why the lease?

If it is for when something unfortunate happens to your wife that you can still live there than a usufruct is actually better because you don't have to pay taxes and it can be for live.

If the bank is listed then the bank is a 'third party' without influence what will be sin somros and sin suan tua.

Those two categories 'sin somros' and 'sin suan tua' should be understood very well because everything financial and about ownerships are based on that when you are married.

http://www.attorneyt...com/pdf/015.pdf

I was unaware that all contracts between husband and wife are dissolved when married. Would that mean that it's impossible to have a pre-numtual contact signed and enforced here?

I am only listed as the lien holder on the land so that my name is as well listen on the land dead in case someone unfortunate happens to my wife. My intention was never to try and sue my wife over who had proper rights on the land but rather insure that the land stays in our family god-forbid something tragic should occur.

Thank you for your insight.

[Nisa]

Did you see the article that claimed 59% of farmers rent their farmland? So who owns it? Who is the law actually protecting?

Mainly politicians, and large families with political connections.

I wonder how many of these farmers owned their land pre-Thaksin government loan programs ... but that is a question for another topic.

Edit: Actually I am wondering if this number is actually encouraging. My guess is that in most developed nations the vast majority of farmland is now owned by corporations. The days of mom and pops farms is gone and Thailand still having 41% of farmers still owning their own land is kind of surprising given how hard it is everywhere else to compete against the big when it comes to most things but especially farming.

Not sure of any national figures, however in the district where I reside in the last 10 years, large tracts of farmland have been gobbled up by:

1. Factory zones - equivalent to maybe a 700 - 1000 Rai - Much used for BOI (100% foreign) sold to foreign companies at ridiculously inflated prices.
   
2. BOI (100% foreign) AG companies - approx. 3000 Rai.
   
3. Thai owned Ag companies, and their sub-contractors - more than 20,000 Rai.
   
4. Pottaman Damapong - in excess of 5000 Rai. (Rumoured to be payment for money lent to prospective MP's election campaigns.)
   

Interesting. I remember reading something back in the US about a big concern with foreign investors buying up the farmland there. I have no idea what the break down is but can't help but wonder if it is mainly the Chinese attempt to control and or insure they have enough inexpensive food to feed their 1 billion plus people.

[Nisa]

As a rule, I try to keep out of politics in my host country of 20 years, but here is an issue that requires action.

I believe it is time for us Thaivisa readers/contributors to lobby political representatives in our various homelands for a cause about which many of us feel passionate.

The cause is reciprocal rights for property ownership. If a Thai may own property, to a reasonable extent, in our homeland, then we expect the same right in Thailand.

Write to your political representatives in your various homelands to address this huge injustice. Ambassadors, Bundestag delegates, MP's, etc, but really.... this is quite unacceptable.

I am not talking about the right to buy 1000 rai of prime farmland, but at least the right to own a personal residential property in one's own name, especially if a Thai family is involved

I am quite certain that this cause will gain traction if enough TV readers spend 20 minutes doing what NEEDS to be done.

Great idea and better than doing nothing. Maybe we cab get a standard well worded letter with spaces to fill in the gaps. TV members from various countries can translate and we all send it email and snail mail to our embassy and to the appropriate MP's back home. Any further ideas? This should be done simply to try and establish fair reciprocal agreemants. In London/UK, anybody can buy anything. Can we own land in the Middle East/Parts of Asia etc, no.

This is a good idea, surely there is someone out there who could draft a standard letter which we can send to our appropriate MP's or persons of position in our countries.

I say we first petition our governments to allow our Thai wives and girlfriends the same easy access into our home countries as Thailand allows us. ;-)

Edited March 13, 2012 by Nisa