Thai Commerce Ministry Launches Probe Into Irregular Shareholdings By Foreigners

[webfact]

Commerce Ministry launches probe into irregular shareholdings by foreigners

BANGKOK, 22 June 2012 (NNT) – The Commerce Ministry has initiated a probe into cases of foreign shareholdings in Thai companies that are above legal limit.

Deputy Commerce Minister Siriwat Kajornprasart said on Thursday that he has assigned the Department of Business Development to work with the Department of Special Investigation in launching an in-depth probe into any irregular foreign shareholdings among Thai-based companies.

The probe has been initiated after the spread of rumors, which suggested that there are quite a number of local companies, particularly those in hotel &resort and agro-industry sectors, with more than 49 percent of shares held by foreign investors and entities.

Foreign shareholding that exceeds 49 percent is illegal in Thailand.

Mr. Siriwat said that the Business Development Department has been conducting such probes in various provinces, including Chanthaburi, Rayong, Trat, Phuket and Chonburi. And, so far, no irregularities have been confirmed.

The Deputy Commerce Minister, however, threatened those who have broken the laws to be prepared for maximum legal actions.

-- NNT 2012-06-22

[GentlemanJim]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Edited June 22, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[NBD]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

[jonclark]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

Exactly - more foreign money brings more jobs, salaries increase, better infrastructure and more importantly more tax revenue for the US / UK governments which can be spent on education, social welfare, defense etc.

[Moruya]

The PTP plans for ASEAN.

Well done boys and girls!

[h90]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Easy to understand: UK has no problem if someone invest large amounts in UK. So no reason to make it reciprocate. For land and property Thailand has a good reason, because it must prevent that foreigner buy every nice place here. We had the same problems in Austria, every nice place was owned by Germans.

[impulse]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners.

Or perhaps Thailand is the one reciprocating?

If a Brit can afford a plane ticket to Thailand and back, he can get a visa.

Does the UK reciprocate there, allowing any Thai an eezy-peezy tourist visa? After all, tourism is great for the UK, eh?

I find Thailand's differential treatment of foreigners frustrating myself. But face it, if they allowed foreigners to own land, a tiny group of the 1% (or a few Chinese state owned enterprises) could come in and buy pretty much all of it.

And if they set aside a certain percentage of land to allow foreign ownership, you and I would be out of luck anyway because we couldn't afford the prices driven up by the 1% and SOE's.

Edited June 22, 2012 by impulse

[Pseudolus]

Sure, visas to other country is hard for Thais because if not, all the dorty old men sex tourists would be flying their hookers into town fr a jump and then kicking them out into the street where they would stay illegally. In a nut shell.

Thailand loves to f*(k the farangs because in their mind they simply believe that all farangs do is f#%k their girls. And they hate it. they are clueless about anything in the real world, and the HiSo elite know dam_n well that as soon as free market competition is opened up all of their crumby companies (the Banks, telcom / IT / TV / internet / infrastructure etc etc etc) will be torn apart by first rate businesses that know the meaning of the phrases "Customer Satisfaction" and "do a proper job". So they will resist resist and then resist some more and things will never change.

[jonclark]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners.

I find Thailand's differential treatment of foreigners frustrating myself. But face it, if they allowed foreigners to own land, a tiny group of the 1% (or a few Chinese state owned enterprises) could come in and buy pretty much all of it.

And if they set aside a certain percentage of land to allow foreign ownership, you and I would be out of luck anyway because we couldn't afford the prices driven up by the 1% and SOE's.

Sounds like scaremongering to me. Why would Chinese state enterprises come in and buy all the land. Is Thailand's land that sought after?? Why? What is so special about it?

Why aren't Chinese state enterprises buying up massive chunks of Europe, US, Australia. The truth is (IMHO) that you would see similar amounts of foreign ownership in Thailand as you do in other countries. And remember this if the Thais sell their lands, with the money they make, the will go and buy land elsewhere. Its often forgotten that the seller, probably a Thai will end up with a big wad of cash and will use that to fund other land purchases (probably) in Thailand.

I have several relatives who have land sitting idle which they don't want to use, but can't find a buyer for. Which means their capital is effectively locked away. To access it they take out loans secured against it.

[NBD]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

Exactly - more foreign money brings more jobs, salaries increase, better infrastructure and more importantly more tax revenue for the US / UK governments which can be spent on education, social welfare, defense etc.

I just wish people would wake up to the idea that the same is true of trade for pretty much exactly the same reasons, instead of taking the strange view that imports are bad, exports are good. Free trade is OK but we'll only reduce our tariffs if they reduce theirs.

[LuckyLew]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

Exactly - more foreign money brings more jobs, salaries increase, better infrastructure and more importantly more tax revenue for the US / UK governments which can be spent on education, social welfare, defense etc.

Exactly, the Thai government does not want the people to be educated and to make more money.

If they did the people would soon enough realize they have had the wool pulled over their eyes for so long.

[Arkady]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Some countries do this on land ownership at least, e.g. S Korea, Taiwan and Turkey. The problem is that developed countries sent legal standards that they feel are just for all and appropriate for their own societies' need and are never going to adjust the legal system based on what tin pot third world countries do.

[frank2611]

I see nothing wrong with Thais owning Thailand. It is similar in some areas of Australia like companies. We should have kept closer to Thailand instead of allowing Moozies in to but up the country like they are doing now.

[pointoffew]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Do I understand you correctly, that because all Thai are always required to obtain a visa prior to any visit to the UK, any and all Brits should always be required to obtain a visa prior to any visit to Thailand?

[reader]

Switzerland is one such country that does impose reciprocol restrictions on Thais wishing to purchase land.

with regards to the attraction of Thailand in general, certainly it's losing it's sheen in favour of other countries which are making good headway to allow foreigners to own land such as Burma, which IMHO will seriously effect tourism as time goes by. The extreme xenephobic legislation in Thailand is becoming tiresome, and resulting in many considering giving Thailand a wide berth.If such leglislation continues, then certainly we will see a significant drop of foreigners residing or even coming here. It is a shame that Thailand persistantly feels the need to restrict foreigners but in the end they lose out to other countries which will profit from their complacency. Burma is now acknowledged as the next haven and Thailand should take note that unless it relaxes such leglislation then I can only see things getting worse in the land of smiles.

Edited June 22, 2012 by reader

[animatic]

This comes up every time True Corp is getting close to government ministeries.

This is their main way of profiting, doing their darndest to prevent foreign competition;

Read : actual service and understanding of technology

They want an un-level playing field,

especially when they are on the wrong tilt of a playing field themselves.

Then they play the Nationalist Card and hope the ministers don't dare to be labeled un-patriotic.

Edited June 22, 2012 by animatic

[tragickingdom]

It is about time that foreign countries are going to pay Thai shareholders back with the same currency by excluding them too from holding majority stakes in their own companies abroad. What does Thailand fear? That they become competitive and that the elite can no longer rob the consumers blind?

[Arkady]

This whole investigation is based on the sour grapes complaints of a handful of Thai Chinese rice traders, whose real problem is with the government's rice mortgage system that has killed their export businesses. The foreigners who are in agribusiness are well known in the provinces they operate and pay off the right local politicians and police. So no one will be discovered, just like the last probe, although some extra payments will be made to corrupt officials.

These foreigners are only a blip that don't make any difference at the national level. The government and the Chinese rice traders have no need to worry. Foreign investors are not going to take the Thai rice industry out of the stone age or do anything to reverse the government's policy of sharply reducing its competitiveness to ensure the farmers remain poor and dependent on hand outs by politicians.

It is purely racist grandstanding, which unfortunately always sells wells in countries with poor educational systems like Thailand, designed to distract attention from the rising cost of living and the disastrous effects of the rice mortgage scheme.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Arkady

[givenall]

Time for foreigners bashing again. Thai government looks to be like Thai gals, give your money and leave me alone

[Arkady]

This comes up every time True Corp is getting close to government ministeries.

This is their main way of profiting, doing their darndest to prevent foreign competition;

Read : actual service and understanding of technology

They want an un-level playing field,

especially when they are on the wrong tilt of a playing field themselves.

Then they play the Nationalist Card and hope the ministers don't dare to be labeled un-patriotic.

This is absolutely true. Also don't forget that TRUE = CP Group which is the largest agribusiness group on Thailand and one of the largest in China too. They have huge investments in Asia and elsewhere and would find it extremely inconvenient if foreign governments suddenly ordered them to sell down to minority positions on a reciprocal basis to reflect the way CP always urges its own government to discriminate against foreign investors in Thailand.

[Ratzebock]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Easy to understand: UK has no problem if someone invest large amounts in UK. So no reason to make it reciprocate. For land and property Thailand has a good reason, because it must prevent that foreigner buy every nice place here. We had the same problems in Austria, every nice place was owned by Germans.

"We had the same problems in Austria, every nice place was owned by Germans.", Which nursery did you learn that

[12DrinkMore]

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

Property price inflation does not make the country richer.

It results in the natives being out priced, and unable to afford property in their own country.

[Considered Opinion]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Totally agree. I don't believe Thais should be allowed to buy land here either. Chinese the same. In fact anywhere you can't go and buy land, don't let them buy land here. Problem with the spineless Australian government is that they let any old pr*ck come and buy the farm just make sure the trade keeps coming.

Worthless scum. That having been said, better this investigation, than run round collecting the stabbing cabbies and other human detritus that kills foreigners I suppose.

Has anyone ever asked how you become a Thai minister? Most of them are morons, with very few exceptions.

[Pops]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Easy to understand: UK has no problem if someone invest large amounts in UK. So no reason to make it reciprocate. For land and property Thailand has a good reason, because it must prevent that foreigner buy every nice place here. We had the same problems in Austria, every nice place was owned by Germans.

Buying land is also investing in a country isn't it smarty.

What is the problem with Germans buying nice pieces of land land in Australia ?

If some Australian would have liked these pieces of land he should have bought them.

Globalisation brother, equal rights etc. etc.

These Germans in Australia even have a chance of becoming Australians themselves.

Wonderful isn't it !!

Now compare this to the chances foreigners have in Thailand regarding owning land and owning and operating businesses.

I love this country with all my heart, but we must admit that some things should change.

[Skywalker69]

The PTP plans for ASEAN.

Well done boys and girls!

Love your comment.ASEAN will soon

hit Thailand in the head and hit hard.

[jonclark]

Because western governments and electorates are smart enough to realise such protectionism doesn't work. What it would mean is that the price of top end houses, football clubs etc in the UK would fall pretty sharply, investment would dry up and the UK would be poorer as a result. If Thai, Russians and middle eastern billionaires want to spend their money in the UK, good for the UK.

Property price inflation does not make the country richer.

It results in the natives being out priced, and unable to afford property in their own country.

Russian & Middle Eastern Billionaires are hardly going to be interested in two bedroom semi in Rochdale are they??

[Considered Opinion]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners.

I find Thailand's differential treatment of foreigners frustrating myself. But face it, if they allowed foreigners to own land, a tiny group of the 1% (or a few Chinese state owned enterprises) could come in and buy pretty much all of it.

And if they set aside a certain percentage of land to allow foreign ownership, you and I would be out of luck anyway because we couldn't afford the prices driven up by the 1% and SOE's.

Sounds like scaremongering to me. Why would Chinese state enterprises come in and buy all the land. Is Thailand's land that sought after?? Why? What is so special about it?

Why aren't Chinese state enterprises buying up massive chunks of Europe, US, Australia. The truth is (IMHO) that you would see similar amounts of foreign ownership in Thailand as you do in other countries. And remember this if the Thais sell their lands, with the money they make, the will go and buy land elsewhere. Its often forgotten that the seller, probably a Thai will end up with a big wad of cash and will use that to fund other land purchases (probably) in Thailand.

I have several relatives who have land sitting idle which they don't want to use, but can't find a buyer for. Which means their capital is effectively locked away. To access it they take out loans secured against it.

In fact Chinese SOE's are doing exactly that in Australia because our erected lepresentatives are spineless, gormless goats.

[thaifamilyguy]

To get back on topic

So people in denial here? How many foreignors have put them in positions of "owning" through structures that are not defensible? It would appear that no one would have avoided the formality of shares being properly allocated between Foreign and local on the books, so is this about going behind that?

Of course the fact that Phuket was previously investigated makes it appear to be that only a cursory review involved, all corruption aside.

If I have it right, everybody seems to ultimately default to, "there are too many of us, they could never enforce the law..." Or as in Casablanca:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]

Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.

[aloud]

Captain Renault: Everybody out at once!

Or am I missing something?

[VisasPlus]

I have never understood why other countries do not reciprocate the 'rules and regulations' that countries such as Thailand impose on foreigners. For example, if a Brit cannot own land or property in Thailand , then a Thai should be under the same rules in the UK, if a Brit cannot own a company in Thailand then the same should apply in the UK for Thai nationals. Things would soon change in Thailand, Saudi and the UAE if we simply matched their respective regulations. When the elite suddenly found they cannot own properties in London and shift large amounts of money by say owning football clubs ! Then things would rapidly change for us.

It sounds like the Deputy Commerce Minister has been shafted on a shares deal so has started a vendetta.

Easy to understand: UK has no problem if someone invest large amounts in UK. So no reason to make it reciprocate. For land and property Thailand has a good reason, because it must prevent that foreigner buy every nice place here. We had the same problems in Austria, every nice place was owned by Germans.

Buying land is also investing in a country isn't it smarty.

What is the problem with Germans buying nice pieces of land land in Australia ?

If some Australian would have liked these pieces of land he should have bought them.

Globalisation brother, equal rights etc. etc.

These Germans in Australia even have a chance of becoming Australians themselves.

Wonderful isn't it !!

Now compare this to the chances foreigners have in Thailand regarding owning land and owning and operating businesses.

I love this country with all my heart, but we must admit that some things should change.

I think he said Austria, not Australia.

[silsburyhill]

Burma is now acknowledged as the next haven

I do believe that all of you banging on about Burma should understand that country has a very long way to go before it can claim itself to be a threat to Thailand's tourist industry. Notwithstanding it's infrastructure, or lack thereof, the main headline in the paper that cannot be named is titled 'Western Burma Burning'. Daw Aung Suu may be out of detention, but her country not out of the woods by a long way yet, certainly not in the foreseeable future.

As to the 'The UK should let foreign billionaires in so their taxes can be used for the betterment of society' [sic], Newsflash - The City of London is amongst the most popular tax havens in the world.

And why do the Chinese, in particular, buy great swathes land here? Money laundering. Same as the wealthy Thais/Russians. Yet more shophouses here on Phuket being slung up at an alarming rate, where they can be squeezed in between the already row upon row of empty ones having sat idle for years.

PS Never thought I'd say it, but Good For Switzerland