Crackdown On Land Owned By Foreign Residents

[rayw]

What utter crap 1/3rd of all Thailand foreign owned. Why all the paranoia anyway??

Seriously what would make life much easier for Thailand is if they allowed qualifying retirees with retirement visas the right to own say even up to half a rai of land (surely enough for genuine retirement home use) for a retirement home. Come on now why do they not use their brains and realise that this would hardly impact probably no more than 0.0001% at most of Thai land ownership and save them a lot of time for chasing up the foreign (and Thai) land sharks that are indeed doing Thailand no good at all. Like most Thais and foreigners too I really hate these land sharks who spend their lives ripping other folk off to make more and more millions of dollars off of the backs of decent folk and anyway more than they could hardly spend in a lifetime. Greedy bastards IMHO and leeches on decent society. Sure I must add that there are also decent and non shark honest land dealers but they seem to be getting a smaller and smaller percentage these days. Either way it is time that the Thai authorities got their priorities right and legally separated these big commercial land operators from the huge majority of foreign retirees and work permit holders who just want to honestly own their own residence with a small practical bit of land (say up to half a Rai).

One thing that I fail to understand if a Thai wife owns the land for her and her foreigner husband where is the law being broken there as the land is then fully Thai owned surely ????????????? It is a method I would never use as with most retirees their home is probably their only asset left in life so why risk it as ANY wife whatever you may think today could just decide to kick you out and divorce you and then legally just keep all the land and home you paid for, a bit silly to let this happen IMHO. I trusted two UK wives before and one ripped me off the the other was decent and split it all 50/50 (and indeed she put in 50% in the first place) but why do so many falangs still risk losing everything here ???? If the Thai law allowed I would happily make the ownership of my home here 50/50 with my Thai wife who I have been with for 8 years and although she put in none of the original money she has put a lot of work and effort into our home and brought with her owned earned income many things for it too and for sure when I die it all rightly goes to her.

A Thai law allowing small land ownership by foreign retirees for a retirement home was I understand proposed by the pre Thaksin Democrat Government but never had time to get passed and not ratified by Thaksin of course who only loves foreigners when he needs them to help keep him away from jail !!! Visa qualifying retirees are good for Thailand as we all know bringing in good hard cash every month and generally helping the Thai people and economy. Retirement home ownership is highly encouraged in almost all other countries that are capable of sensible thought and planning. There are of course other foreigners who should also be allowed to own a small area of land for their personal residence like under 50s who have retired early or those on work permits but that is another subject, but the foreign retirement land ownership issue is easy and safe to implement in law and in Thailand's interests too.

Edited March 13, 2012 by rayw

[Puwa]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

[regine]

I think the Thai property laws are smart.

Foreign property buyers is a huge problem in the West. You can't even buy real estate in Vancouver because non-Canadians (mostly Chinese) are driving up the housing prices. Land banking in Australia is also a problem and the government tightened the rules on foreign investment in 2010.

I think it should be a given that in order for anyone to own property in any country, you must be a citizen of that country.

[Reasonableman]

Seems just a tad hypocritical for the Thai government to encourage tourists to come to Thailand and spend their hard earned foreign currency in Thailand, but then say it is illegal for the 'few' to purchase land for their wives, girlfriends, boyfriends etc. etc.

Maybe the likes of the UK etc. should rescind all land / properties owned by the current 'mob' of Thai politicians.

There is nothing illegal about giving a Thai money to buy property as long as it is there property. And I guess once the UK allows Thais to visit without the need of visa then your argument of double standard might hold some water ... by they way, there are plenty of wealthy foreigners who own land in Thailand.

• Visa conditions are hardly the same as the right to buy real estate, Nisa. That is a red herring, and you know it.
  

• Why would foreigners want to GIVE THEIR money to a Thai, FGS, for something they cannot own? Would you?
  

[Nisa]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

[airconsult]

Please recheck - I said *foreign* spouses, not Thai spouses.

Though actually you make a good point, why should a Thai wife with a foreign spouse have to prove where the money came from? What if you required proof of all buyers that the money was obtained legally? The whole system could collapse!!!!!

Cheers

Sorry I misread that because I never thought anybody could with a straight face say the human rights of farang are abused because the married a Thai.

Please tell me what right they lose by marrying a Thai?

And a Thai spouse married to a farang doesn't have to prove anymore where the money came from than anybody else. There is absolutely nothing wrong with her buying land given to her by her spouse as long as she is not buying the land for a foreigner (regardless if a spouse or not).

Get over it, it is not at all uncommon for countries, especially in Asia to restrict foreigners from buying land. And despite our belief that Thailand can't survive without us or how much better Thailand would be if they allowed us citizenship, it is not what they want and it is there county to decide. If we want to live by western ways then we all know what to do.

Ok - A Thai lady marries a foreigner, they buy a house, they have 2 children, aged 3 and 5 - the wife passes away. Do you see the problem? The foreigner is denied the right to raise the children in the family home, and in fact if they have not been married long enough for citizenship, he must leave the country, (but that's O/T here).

I'm not sure why you feel that that's not a problem?

I am not sure why you believe any of this to be true if you have at all researched the issue or why you would even believe that after some time frame of being married that a Farang is going to become a citizen or that a farang needs to leave the country when their spouse passes away.

As with any marriage and homeownership as well as having kids things need to be considered such as wills and a usufruct. There is no reason that the husband or kids would need to be put out of the house if the wife died.

You pointed it out exactly - the basic protections do not exist. Yes, there are ways, and they can be complicated, but the point is that with the foreign spouse being denied ownership, he/she is stripped of an important legal protection.

AT no point did I say a foreigner could become a citizen or permanent resident by sitting on their a*se, it is a long and involved process.

[indyuk]

Crackdown like last time?

Nothing happened.

Not true 1000's of Expat's left Thailand as a result of Taksin's ridiculous Edit on foreign ownership of Land.

The reality is that foreigner's with Thai wives have no choice because Thai Law prohibits gifting assets to Thai women.

[Thai at Heart]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

It was after all only the attorney general speaking. For a moment, it would appear he may be an informed powerful civil servant or something.

[F1fanatic]

As stated in several posts, a completely, utterly ridiculous statement.

Take myself, I live in a house that is situated on the land my wife owns, yes the money that paid for this came from me, but the deeds are in her name and not mine, so the land remains Thai owned and it always will as it will be passed on to our children.

The money that paid for this was earned here in Thailand, Thai taxes were paid on that money.

But, why is it they fail to understand that the money that the majority of Foreigners paid for land that their partners own came from overseas, this money was not in circulation in Thailand prior to this, which makes it 'good' money (so long as it wasn't earned illegally of course ).

Seems just a tad hypocritical for the Thai government to encourage tourists to come to Thailand and spend their hard earned foreign currency in Thailand, but then say it is illegal for the 'few' to purchase land for their wives, girlfriends, boyfriends etc. etc.

Maybe the likes of the UK etc. should rescind all land / properties owned by the current 'mob' of Thai politicians.

I think it is 'cos we have pushed land prices up (in certain areas) so that the average local can no longer afford to purchase any land?

It has made a few Thais with pretty much worthless land (as far as the locals were concerned) very rich though.

I do agree that any farang who has purchased land for his wife should be exempted from any witch hunt. The land does not belong to the farang - it belongs to a Thai.

[Reasonableman]

I think the Thai property laws are smart.

Foreign property buyers is a huge problem in the West. You can't even buy real estate in Vancouver because non-Canadians (mostly Chinese) are driving up the housing prices. Land banking in Australia is also a problem and the government tightened the rules on foreign investment in 2010.

I think it should be a given that in order for anyone to own property in any country, you must be a citizen of that country.

So that brings us full circle to nominees, again... and what of businesses, corporations, educational institutions, NGOs etc?

[Nisa]

Seems just a tad hypocritical for the Thai government to encourage tourists to come to Thailand and spend their hard earned foreign currency in Thailand, but then say it is illegal for the 'few' to purchase land for their wives, girlfriends, boyfriends etc. etc.

Maybe the likes of the UK etc. should rescind all land / properties owned by the current 'mob' of Thai politicians.

There is nothing illegal about giving a Thai money to buy property as long as it is there property. And I guess once the UK allows Thais to visit without the need of visa then your argument of double standard might hold some water ... by they way, there are plenty of wealthy foreigners who own land in Thailand.

• Visa conditions are hardly the same as the right to buy real estate, Nisa. That is a red herring, and you know it.
  

• Why would foreigners want to GIVE THEIR money to a Thai, FGS, for something they cannot own? Would you?
  

It is not a red herring at all when it is being insinuated that farangs are some who worse off than Thais. As for buying land for a Thai, I thought I was responding to your above/below comment ...

it is illegal for the

'few'

to purchase land for their wives, girlfriends, boyfriends etc. etc.

but maybe you are suggesting that a Thai GF wants to buy a farang land?

Get over it, the law here and in MANY countries is that foreigners cannot buy land.

As for giving a spouse or GF money to buy a home, it is actually very common here and the farangs who do it are well aware of the laws.

[F1fanatic]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

Ummm - to address a point made by many posters - I think the article said that 30% of land in Hua Hin and Pattaya was owned by foreigners - not 30% of all Thailand.

[Edwin Buurman]

The timing off this news report is according to me no coincidence. Last week/currently in the; www.phuketgazette.net / www.phuketwan.com / www.thephuketnews.com articles about fraude & corruption by Phuket officials (including a current Senator before vice-governor/governor off Phuket). High ranking land officials and city & village officials (to acquire the needed building) and village heads Kamnans & mayors must be aware off this practices also.

A lot off low titled land without ownership and state forest was upgraded to chanotes and suddenly had owners (from the so called level; The untouchables).

A lot off this land has been developed into luxury resorts and private estates. These are often partly owned by foreign investors but a lot belongs to the Thai happy few (extremely rich and influential.

It looks like there is involvement from all colors (Red & Yellow, local parties, democrats)

Many land is developed above the 80 meter zone which is illegal on Phuket. A lot off buildings are within the forbidden zone off 25 meters from high water tide as beach properties.

There is currently a investigation going on this topic.

Now the foreigners get the blame although nothing illegal could have occurred without knowledge, approval & cooperation from Thai officials and Thai landowners.

It is good to prevent illegalities, but according to article 17.1 and 17.2 every one (all humans) have the right to own property. There should at least be made a difference between the reason and purpose off ownership.

How can Thailand be so old fashioned in his ownership rights. And was has National security?

No one will take away parts off Thailand out off it.

The recent bombings and preparation off them where done from a rented house. (Like Anders Breivik in Norway prepared his bomb attack from a rented farm).

[regine]

I think the Thai property laws are smart.

Foreign property buyers is a huge problem in the West. You can't even buy real estate in Vancouver because non-Canadians (mostly Chinese) are driving up the housing prices. Land banking in Australia is also a problem and the government tightened the rules on foreign investment in 2010.

I think it should be a given that in order for anyone to own property in any country, you must be a citizen of that country.

So that brings us full circle to nominees, again... and what of businesses, corporations, educational institutions, NGOs etc?

Land leases.

[F1fanatic]

What utter crap 1/3rd of all Thailand foreign owned. Why all the paranoia anyway??

Seriously what would make life much easier for Thailand is if they allowed qualifying retirees with retirement visas the right to own say even up to half a rai of land (surely enough for genuine retirement home use) for a retirement home. Come on now why do they not use their brains and realise that this would hardly impact probably no more than 0.0001% at most of Thai land ownership and save them a lot of time for chasing up the foreign (and Thai) land sharks that are indeed doing Thailand no good at all. Like most Thais and foreigners too I really hate these land sharks who spend their lives ripping other folk off to make more and more millions of dollars off of the backs of decent folk and anyway more than they could hardly spend in a lifetime. Greedy bastards IMHO and leeches on decent society. Sure I must add that there are also decent and non shark honest land dealers but they seem to be getting a smaller and smaller percentage these days. Either way it is time that the Thai authorities got their priorities right and legally separated these big commercial land operators from the huge majority of foreign retirees and work permit holders who just want to honestly own their own residence with a small practical bit of land (say up to half a Rai).

One thing that I fail to understand if a Thai wife owns the land for her and her foreigner husband where is the law being broken there as the land is then fully Thai owned surely ????????????? It is a method I would never use as with most retirees their home is probably their only asset left in life so why risk it as ANY wife whatever you may think today could just decide to kick you out and divorce you and then legally just keep all the land and home you paid for, a bit silly to let this happen IMHO. I trusted two UK wives before and one ripped me off the the other was decent and split it all 50/50 (and indeed she put in 50% in the first place) but why do so many falangs still risk losing everything here ???? If the Thai law allowed I would happily make the ownership of my home here 50/50 with my Thai wife who I have been with for 8 years and although she put in none of the original money she has put a lot of work and effort into our home and brought with her owned earned income many things for it too and for sure when I die it all rightly goes to her.

A Thai law allowing small land ownership by foreign retirees for a retirement home was I understand proposed by the pre Thaksin Democrat Government but never had time to get passed and not ratified by Thaksin of course who only loves foreigners when he needs them to help keep him away from jail !!! Visa qualifying retirees are good for Thailand as we all know bringing in good hard cash every month and generally helping the Thai people and economy. Retirement home ownership is highly encouraged in almost all other countries that are capable of sensible thought and planning. There are of course other foreigners who should also be allowed to own a small area of land for their personal residence like under 50s who have retired early or those on work permits but that is another subject, but the foreign retirement land ownership issue is easy and safe to implement in law and in Thailand's interests too.

I disagree as one of the things I disliked about the UK was the way so much of the 'wealthy' part of London was owned by foreigners.

Those of us who retire here have the option of renting or leasing. This helps the Thai economy without pushing up land prices to ridiculous levels whereby the average local can no longer afford to buy any land.

[Nisa]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

It was after all only the attorney general speaking. For a moment, it would appear he may be an informed powerful civil servant or something.

Well let me first start by saying that an Auditor-General is not an Attorney General. Second of all, I believe the Auditor General is Jaruvan Maintaka and not this Sriracha Charoenpanit who I believe is a land inspector.

You ever listen to comments from other leaders in other countries that are ridiculous? Do you believe them? Now take those same ridiculous comments and translate them into a completely different language and put in a news article by somebody who probably doesn't have much command of the new language.

[Om85]

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.

I think that that is a good Idea but if you want a real change in policies we, the foreigners living here should unite and go with our familly memebers to ask for a change of these laws, there is lots of foreigners married with Thai, lets unite and we will see changes.

[Mattd]

There is nothing illegal about giving a Thai money to buy property as long as it is there property. And I guess once the UK allows Thais to visit without the need of visa then your argument of double standard might hold some water ... by they way, there are plenty of wealthy foreigners who own land in Thailand.

What has visas got to do with this?

So, in other words if the UK gave Thai's the right to enter the UK without a visa, then Thailand would let a UK citizen own land in Thailand? (5555555)

Nothing illegal, but do you remember the Interior Minister's statement in Phuket a while back, threatening to take back the land owned by Thai spouses of foreigners, if they could prove the money came from the foreigner??

Actually the percentage of Foreigners owning land in their own name in Thailand is tiny and it is restricted to the very rich, or those that are lucky enough to have Thai citizenship.

The point of the post is the fact that the government are going to investigate land owned by Thai's but purchased by foreigners, as they feel that there will be no land left for Thai's in years to come.

[Nisa]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

Ummm - to address a point made by many posters - I think the article said that 30% of land in Hua Hin and Pattaya was owned by foreigners - not 30% of all Thailand.

To quote from the article ...

Some 100 million rai of Thai land is owned by foreigners, mostly through their Thai spouses or nominees, Auditor-General Sriracha Charoenpanit revealed yesterday.

100 Million rai would equal about 31% of Thailand. As mentioned by another poster ...

(100 million rai = 160,000 km2; Thailand has an area of 513,120 km2) or 31% of 513,120 = 159,000

Edited March 13, 2012 by Nisa

[x5david]

He said if this situation was "unsolved", it could lead to later generations of Thais having no land to live on.

Oh contrare....they will have land, just rent it from the farang...

[Thai at Heart]

He said if this situation was "unsolved", it could lead to later generations of Thais having no land to live on.

Oh contrare....they will have land, just rent it from the farang...

I can't help feeling that part of the problem, is that 100s of thousands of Thai's who would never have been able to afford land, have been able to do so with money from foreign spouses.

[TackyToo]

How about a crack down on stupid officials?!

C'mon, how could they run a country with the last three standing?

[Reasonableman]

AT no point did I say a foreigner could become a citizen or permanent resident by sitting on their a*se, it is a long and involved process.

And having gone through all that, and been granted permanent residency, you should have the right to buy and own enough land to live on, and build a home to live in. Especially those with Thai families and dependants!

[F1fanatic]

I think the Thai property laws are smart.

Foreign property buyers is a huge problem in the West. You can't even buy real estate in Vancouver because non-Canadians (mostly Chinese) are driving up the housing prices. Land banking in Australia is also a problem and the government tightened the rules on foreign investment in 2010.

I think it should be a given that in order for anyone to own property in any country, you must be a citizen of that country.

So that brings us full circle to nominees, again... and what of businesses, corporations, educational institutions, NGOs etc?

Land leases.

That doesn't always work either... take my word for it.

[Nisa]

The point of the post is the fact that the government are going to investigate land owned by Thai's but purchased by foreigners, as they feel that there will be no land left for Thai's in years to come.

Actually it is the reverse -- it is Foreigners owning land purchased by Thais ... which is illegal in this country as well as many others. It really is not an uncommon law for foreigners not to be able to own land in a country and every country has a right to have such a policy and every other country has the right to allow foreigners to buy land and then complain how home prices become unaffordable. I am just at a loss as to how people are making such a big deal about this as if there is some injustice occurring in the world because we cannot have it our way in a country we are not even a citizen.

[Nisa]

AT no point did I say a foreigner could become a citizen or permanent resident by sitting on their a*se, it is a long and involved process.

And having gone through all that, and been granted permanent residency, you should have the right to buy and own enough land to live on, and build a home to live in. Especially those with Thai families and dependants!

If you are a citizen you can buy land. If you are not a citizen then nothing is preventing a foreigner, legally in the country, with a Thai family from building and living in a home with their Thai family. The property just needs to be in one of their Thai family's name.

[takatukaland]

How interesting. Are they afraid they going to take Pattaya or Phuket to other countries, leaving a big whole in the country with just black matter? Maybe it is about time hat Thais will lose their right on landownership abroad too. It will teach them a lesson. Never mind, nothing will happen. Lay down for a few weeks, and the boys in charge have filled their pockets and go back to sleep.

They not afraid at all.but if they need money they change the laws,so some stupid farang comes here and invest money,after they have enough money just change the laws again,and kick out the stupid farang,easy as that,I remember in 90's u got a non immigrant visa if u bought a condo 3million up,today u get a tourist visa,they just changed the laws

[F1fanatic]

some putz makes a comment in a seminar and the newspaper broadcasts it as news, without checking any facts, providing any context, or offering any analysis. what a sorry excuse for journalism.

Sometimes it seems people go out of there way to try to believe BS from some person clearing either speaking out of their a@@, being misquoted, having the translation their words being incorrect or all of the above. I really have to believe there are few posters who are unaware of the gist of the laws in terms of land ownership but I guess it is preferably to pretend something has changed because of some news story that makes no sense and appears to based on what would seem to be a very obvious falsehood of 31% of land being foreign owned.

Ummm - to address a point made by many posters - I think the article said that 30% of land in Hua Hin and Pattaya was owned by foreigners - not 30% of all Thailand.

To quote from the article ...

Some 100 million rai of Thai land is owned by foreigners, mostly through their Thai spouses or nominees, Auditor-General Sriracha Charoenpanit revealed yesterday.

100 Million rai would equal about 31% of Thailand. As mentioned by another poster ...

(100 million rai = 160,000 km2; Thailand has an area of 513,120 km2) or 31% of 513,120 = 159,000

My mistake but, he specifically mentioned Hua Hin and Pattaya so its probably reasonable to assume that he made a mistake with the 100m rai?

[regine]

Actually the percentage of Foreigners owning land in their own name in Thailand is tiny and it is restricted to the very rich, or those that are lucky enough to have Thai citizenship.

If they have Thai citizenship they are no longer foreigners, they are Thai.

[animatic]

He said if this situation was "unsolved", it could lead to later generations of Thais having no land to live on.

Oh contrare....they will have land, just rent it from the farang...

I can't help feeling that part of the problem, is that 100s of thousands of Thai's who would never have been able to afford land, have been able to do so with money from foreign spouses.

But that is 99% women,

and this is the 99% of MEN who will never own land bitching about it.