Land Ownership And Marriage Registration

[chiangrai57020]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

[geordie]

Not sure what you actually mean about your thai spouse not being able to hold land in her name, that was the case before. The law has changed and now Thai woman married to farang can now own land. I was married at the local Amphor and we are buying land now for our daughter.

[Crossy]

Er, don't want to appear picky, but, if you DON'T register your marriage at the Amphur, you are NOT married, period (assuming you didn't get married overseas, in which case registration is not required).

Amongst other things, this prevents you from getting/extending a non-o visa on the grounds of marriage.

AFAIK the laws restricting land ownership etc. have been recinded. However, my wife did not change her name to mine (she changed it back to her maiden name) because she was worried about the 'problems' associated with her having a farang name.

Edited March 6, 2006 by Crossy

[Dragonman]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

1. There is no restriction on the amount of land a thai married to a foreigner can own. There is however a 1 rai restriction on land which can be inherited.

2. Having a foreign name makes no difference to holding or offering a lease.

3. You can inherit as a "Statutory Heir" in certain circumstances! A good lawyer should ensure the will is drafted correctly.

Many people think that by not changing the wife's name, or not registering the marriage, they can get around the law. However No. Mor. Thor 0710/Vor 792 dated 23 March 1999 clearly states that Lawful or unlawful marriages are to be treated in the same way, and are both required to follow the same Land Laws regarding foreigners.

[chiangrai57020]

Thanks for the replies.

What concerns me is the other 'problems(?)', if any, associated with a Thai spouse having the last name of a 'foreigner'!

I was not aware of the land issue. That, with or without the 'foreign' last name a Thai spouse can still own as much land as she wants. It was my impression that the 'foreign' last name would be a restriction on what she could or could not own.

[monty]

No issues on the land ownerships anymore.

However,the foreign spouse is required to sign a statement at the Land and House department which says that the land acquired by his wife is bought with her money only!

The foreign spouse will have no claim on the land in case of a divorce, as the land will be considered property of the wife from before the marriage (as opposed to common property acquired during the marriage).

Appart from this, there is no discrimination whatsoever against Thai people carrying a foreign name through marriage.

I guess the "other" problems will mean like the wife having a name uncomprehensible or unpronounciable to most average Thai people, and the social stigma attached to it, not the legal status part of it!

Edited March 7, 2006 by monty

[thaihome]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

...As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

Land issue has been throughly dicussed so no need to go into it further, other then to say my wife has land in her name at upcountry, a townhouse and condo in Bangkok. All duly registerd with Land Office in her foreign surname. I did indeed have to sign that I had no interest and it was her money. Also, she has had a 30 baht medical card for several years now (though she has never used it).

TH

[mht]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

1. There is no restriction on the amount of land a thai married to a foreigner can own. There is however a 1 rai restriction on land which can be inherited.

2. Having a foreign name makes no difference to holding or offering a lease.

3. You can inherit as a "Statutory Heir" in certain circumstances! A good lawyer should ensure the will is drafted correctly.

Many people think that by not changing the wife's name, or not registering the marriage, they can get around the law. However No. Mor. Thor 0710/Vor 792 dated 23 March 1999 clearly states that Lawful or unlawful marriages are to be treated in the same way, and are both required to follow the same Land Laws regarding foreigners.

If a Thai spouse takes a European surname land/ property be registered in both names. In the name of both husband and wife

[Sirdar]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

[Old Man River]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

While I have been married for many years and our marriage has been registered in Thailand, I am now in process of researching issues relating to our house and land, both of which are in my wife's maiden name. In discussing this with my attorney, he has advised me that since we have registered our marriage in Thailand, I have the protection of Community Property. This allows me the right to continue to live in our house for the rest of my life, should I survive my wife. I am currently researching whether it makes sense to put a 30 year lease on the land or leave it as is, but in any event community property protection should be added to your list of reasons why you should register your marriage in Thailand. Note, as it relates to living in the house, I am told that it doesn't matter whether the title of the house is in your wife's maiden name or her married name, as long as it was acquired while you are legally married in Thailand.

[lopburi3]

If a Thai spouse takes a European surname land/ property be registered in both names. In the name of both husband and wife

Wrong. The land can only be registered in the Thai citizens name. That is the reason the spouse must sign that the money is not joint marriage property.

[Dragonman]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

While I have been married for many years and our marriage has been registered in Thailand, I am now in process of researching issues relating to our house and land, both of which are in my wife's maiden name. In discussing this with my attorney, he has advised me that since we have registered our marriage in Thailand, I have the protection of Community Property. This allows me the right to continue to live in our house for the rest of my life, should I survive my wife. I am currently researching whether it makes sense to put a 30 year lease on the land or leave it as is, but in any event community property protection should be added to your list of reasons why you should register your marriage in Thailand. Note, as it relates to living in the house, I am told that it doesn't matter whether the title of the house is in your wife's maiden name or her married name, as long as it was acquired while you are legally married in Thailand.

Whilst I would like to side with your lawyer in that Community Property laws should have jurisdiction, I am afraid the highest Court in the Land, the Constitutional Court, has seen it fit to exclude land purchased by thais married to foreigners from Community Property. If you are concerned, obtain a lease. But my advice would be not to get it drafted by that lawyer

[Old Man River]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

While I have been married for many years and our marriage has been registered in Thailand, I am now in process of researching issues relating to our house and land, both of which are in my wife's maiden name. In discussing this with my attorney, he has advised me that since we have registered our marriage in Thailand, I have the protection of Community Property. This allows me the right to continue to live in our house for the rest of my life, should I survive my wife. I am currently researching whether it makes sense to put a 30 year lease on the land or leave it as is, but in any event community property protection should be added to your list of reasons why you should register your marriage in Thailand. Note, as it relates to living in the house, I am told that it doesn't matter whether the title of the house is in your wife's maiden name or her married name, as long as it was acquired while you are legally married in Thailand.

Whilst I would like to side with your lawyer in that Community Property laws should have jurisdiction, I am afraid the highest Court in the Land, the Constitutional Court, has seen it fit to exclude land purchased by thais married to foreigners from Community Property. If you are concerned, obtain a lease. But my advice would be not to get it drafted by that lawyer

Again Dragonman, thanks for the advice. On Community Property, my attorney was referring to my right to live in the house for the rest of my life should I survive my wife, and nothing concerning the land (other than my continuing right to live in the house on the land). However, your information on how the courts view land under Community Property is useful. What I am hoping to be able to do, should I survive my wife - this all sounds so morbid, is deed the land over to my (Thai) daughter to keep the land in my immediate family. I think this should be OK, but I am trying now to find out whether there will be any issues if she is still a minor (although I wish my wife a continued long life, of course).

Best regards,

[simon43]

I told my Thai 'wife' that if she didn't want to take my surname when we legally married, then I could change my own surname (easy to do for a Brit).

I suggested to her that I change my surname to 'shinawata'.

Doesn't seem such a good idea now...

BUT! here's a good question:

If I went back to the UK and changed my surname (and got a new passport) with the surname of Shinawata, what sort of problems would I have in Thailand???

Simon Shinawata

[Dragonman]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

While I have been married for many years and our marriage has been registered in Thailand, I am now in process of researching issues relating to our house and land, both of which are in my wife's maiden name. In discussing this with my attorney, he has advised me that since we have registered our marriage in Thailand, I have the protection of Community Property. This allows me the right to continue to live in our house for the rest of my life, should I survive my wife. I am currently researching whether it makes sense to put a 30 year lease on the land or leave it as is, but in any event community property protection should be added to your list of reasons why you should register your marriage in Thailand. Note, as it relates to living in the house, I am told that it doesn't matter whether the title of the house is in your wife's maiden name or her married name, as long as it was acquired while you are legally married in Thailand.

Whilst I would like to side with your lawyer in that Community Property laws should have jurisdiction, I am afraid the highest Court in the Land, the Constitutional Court, has seen it fit to exclude land purchased by thais married to foreigners from Community Property. If you are concerned, obtain a lease. But my advice would be not to get it drafted by that lawyer

Again Dragonman, thanks for the advice. On Community Property, my attorney was referring to my right to live in the house for the rest of my life should I survive my wife, and nothing concerning the land (other than my continuing right to live in the house on the land). However, your information on how the courts view land under Community Property is useful. What I am hoping to be able to do, should I survive my wife - this all sounds so morbid, is deed the land over to my (Thai) daughter to keep the land in my immediate family. I think this should be OK, but I am trying now to find out whether there will be any issues if she is still a minor (although I wish my wife a continued long life, of course).

Best regards,

OMR. I'm afraid there is no guarantee about lifetime use of house. Although some people believe a usufruct will give them this right, historic Court decisions have shown the 30 year limit still applies, despite the Civil Code. I'm not sure if your nickname denotes where you come from in the States, or your age Perhaps 30 year lease would be enough. I understand where your lawyer is coming from in that the changes to the leasehold laws do in fact mention that if you hold a lease, and subsequently build a home and incorporate such within the lease, the lessor cannot evict. Of course this has yet to be tested in Court, and you would hold no land, purely the house and right of way to the property.

I can answer your question regarding your daughter. Your wife's will should leave the property to your daughter. However a thai Court would have jurisdiction over the property until she is 18, if not so already. You however would obviously be entitled to live in the property until the lease expired, or longer if you stay on good terms with your daughter

[Old Man River]

What are the Pros and Cons of registering a marriage at the Amphur?

My observation in registering a Thai marriage with the Ampur is that it 'restricts' the Thai spouse from certain services. In addition, a Thai spouse who wishes to have several Rai of land has to forego purchasing because of the 'foreign' last name. Cannot help but wonder what other problems there may be for a registered marriage of a Thai wife and 'foreign' husband?

This site has many pages and comments regarding Land Ownership and Leasing. It is my opinion that it would be much easier to have a Lease Agreement with a Thai spouse 'without' the foreign last name?

Some may say that you can inherit land from a Thai spouse therefore it would be much better to have a Registered marriage. I go back to some of the opinions regarding 'inheritance'. A 'foreign' spouse can inherit from a Thai spouse BUT Cannot remain on the land beyond 1 year, because we cannot own the land?

As I see it, the reality of registering a marriage is the following: You restrict the Thai spouse from obtaining land, Thai health care (30 Baht system), and I do not what else she could possibly be loosing out on?

I would like to hear from others that have an opinion regarding Registering and NOT Registering a Thai marriage at the Ampur? And, is there a benefit in having a Land Lease agreement with a non-registered marriage.

While I have been married for many years and our marriage has been registered in Thailand, I am now in process of researching issues relating to our house and land, both of which are in my wife's maiden name. In discussing this with my attorney, he has advised me that since we have registered our marriage in Thailand, I have the protection of Community Property. This allows me the right to continue to live in our house for the rest of my life, should I survive my wife. I am currently researching whether it makes sense to put a 30 year lease on the land or leave it as is, but in any event community property protection should be added to your list of reasons why you should register your marriage in Thailand. Note, as it relates to living in the house, I am told that it doesn't matter whether the title of the house is in your wife's maiden name or her married name, as long as it was acquired while you are legally married in Thailand.

Whilst I would like to side with your lawyer in that Community Property laws should have jurisdiction, I am afraid the highest Court in the Land, the Constitutional Court, has seen it fit to exclude land purchased by thais married to foreigners from Community Property. If you are concerned, obtain a lease. But my advice would be not to get it drafted by that lawyer

Again Dragonman, thanks for the advice. On Community Property, my attorney was referring to my right to live in the house for the rest of my life should I survive my wife, and nothing concerning the land (other than my continuing right to live in the house on the land). However, your information on how the courts view land under Community Property is useful. What I am hoping to be able to do, should I survive my wife - this all sounds so morbid, is deed the land over to my (Thai) daughter to keep the land in my immediate family. I think this should be OK, but I am trying now to find out whether there will be any issues if she is still a minor (although I wish my wife a continued long life, of course).

Best regards,

OMR. I'm afraid there is no guarantee about lifetime use of house. Although some people believe a usufruct will give them this right, historic Court decisions have shown the 30 year limit still applies, despite the Civil Code. I'm not sure if your nickname denotes where you come from in the States, or your age Perhaps 30 year lease would be enough. I understand where your lawyer is coming from in that the changes to the leasehold laws do in fact mention that if you hold a lease, and subsequently build a home and incorporate such within the lease, the lessor cannot evict. Of course this has yet to be tested in Court, and you would hold no land, purely the house and right of way to the property.

I can answer your question regarding your daughter. Your wife's will should leave the property to your daughter. However a thai Court would have jurisdiction over the property until she is 18, if not so already. You however would obviously be entitled to live in the property until the lease expired, or longer if you stay on good terms with your daughter

Again, thanks for the advice. In retrospect, it does make a lot of sense to amend my wife's Will and have the land left to my daughter instead of to me.

As it relates to Community Property, my attorney's law firm has opined that should I survive my wife, I would have the right to live in the house until my death regardless of how long I live or whether there is a lease on the property or who owns the property. In your opinion, is he correct on this? As it relates to the house, is there a 30 year time limit on Community Property as well?

While I have complete trust in my wife (of more than 30 years) and daughter, for peace of mind I guess it makes sense to put a lease on the property. Both my wife and daughter are dual nationals, and who knows, laws could change.

OMR relates more to my age (I am closing in on 60) and my fondness for the song than to where I come from in the US. The big river near where I grew up is the Hudson.

Best regards.

[Dragonman]

OMR. Since you state you have been married for many years, was your wife owner of the property prior to the 1999 change in "thai married to foreigner" ownership laws. Whichever way, your wife's ownership of the property is outside community property, as before 1999 she could not own land if married to a foreigner, unless bought before marriage. I would advise you request your lawyer confirm under what legislation you are entitled to reside at the property on her death. My legal documentation shows you have no rights under thai law to reside in the property for more than 1 year without a lease.

[Old Man River]

I know it sounds too good to be true, but I have used a law firm with an excellent reputation. They have opined that I can inherit and own both the house and land with no time limit.

As it pertains to the house, should I survive my wife, I am told that based on Community Property I would own 50% of the house and inherit the other 50% (as our Wills stipulate).

The land was acquired by my wife after 1999 and the house was also built after 1999. According to the Land Code, Sections 93 and 87, the attorney's have opined that should I survive my wife, as her legal statuatory heir, I can inherit (and own) land for residential purpose to the extent the total area does not exceed 1 rai.

I am also told that besides the lease route, another way to do this would be to transfer everything to our daughter now. Tax would have to be paid on the land transfer (which it would at some point anyway), similar to tax on a lease. My wife could then ask the court to create a Right of Habitation on the minor's property. The Right of Habitation allows rent free domicle for the life of the grantee or for a period of time not exceeding 30 years. No additional tax on the registration of the Right of Habitation would have to be paid.

Dragonman, please let me know your take on this. I obviously want to abide by the law, whatever this ends up being. While I don't ever envision anything I do ending up in court by any of our family, as our child gets it all anyway, I don't want to be in my mid 80's and find some local government official with his hand out because I am a foreigner and have documented this incorrectly. Of course, if I don't survive my wife, I guess none of this really matters as the wife is a Thai national.

Thanks,

[Dragonman]

I know it sounds too good to be true, but I have used a law firm with an excellent reputation. They have opined that I can inherit and own both the house and land with no time limit.

As it pertains to the house, should I survive my wife, I am told that based on Community Property I would own 50% of the house and inherit the other 50% (as our Wills stipulate).

The land was acquired by my wife after 1999 and the house was also built after 1999. According to the Land Code, Sections 93 and 87, the attorney's have opined that should I survive my wife, as her legal statuatory heir, I can inherit (and own) land for residential purpose to the extent the total area does not exceed 1 rai.

I am also told that besides the lease route, another way to do this would be to transfer everything to our daughter now. Tax would have to be paid on the land transfer (which it would at some point anyway), similar to tax on a lease. My wife could then ask the court to create a Right of Habitation on the minor's property. The Right of Habitation allows rent free domicle for the life of the grantee or for a period of time not exceeding 30 years. No additional tax on the registration of the Right of Habitation would have to be paid.

Dragonman, please let me know your take on this. I obviously want to abide by the law, whatever this ends up being. While I don't ever envision anything I do ending up in court by any of our family, as our child gets it all anyway, I don't want to be in my mid 80's and find some local government official with his hand out because I am a foreigner and have documented this incorrectly. Of course, if I don't survive my wife, I guess none of this really matters as the wife is a Thai national.

Thanks,

Hi OMR. What your lawyer says is strictly correct in law. You CAN inherit the land. However this is strictly with the agreement of the Minister of Interior. As far as I am aware no Minister has yet given agreement to this, but will give agreement for you living in the property( for up to 1 year) until it is sold or transferred to a Thai.

The Right of Habitation is indeed a viable option.

[Old Man River]

Thanks again.

Are you in agreement, should I survive my wife, that Community Property would allow me to stay in the house until my death? If yes, would it be rent free or would it depend on who owns the land?

[Dragonman]

Thanks again.

Are you in agreement, should I survive my wife, that Community Property would allow me to stay in the house until my death? If yes, would it be rent free or would it depend on who owns the land?

No, the Constitutional Court has ruled that foreigners do not have Community Property rights to land. The longest you could live rent free is 30 years, unless the then owner after 30 years agreed.

Community property does not exist on death, purely on divorce. Unless a well constructed will is drafted, and you are deemed by a judge "statutory heir", normal thai inheritance laws are in effect.

[Gary A]

Many different circumstances require many different solutions. In my case there are no children nor will there be any children. Our house belonged to my wife before we were married. After we were married she went to the local amphur and had her surname changed to mine. I told her that it made me no difference whether she changed her last name or not. She opted to have it changed. She then wanted my name added to her house papers and was upset when the amphur told her that it could not be done. Since I am 61 and she is 38 it is not likely that I will outlive her. If something were to happen to her I would not want to stay in the house anyways. I think you should ask yourself if you would want to continue living where you are if the marriage were to fail or if there should be a death.

I knew one guy who was married to a Thai lady for more than 20 years. They had several children together. The house and the pickup truck were in her name. After returning from a trip to Bangkok he found all the locks on the house changed. The police came and told him he had to leave. He returned to Bangkok and within a few days the police came and took his pickup truck. It did go to court and he was awarded half of everything. Unfortunately after several more years he is yet to get anything from her other than his clothes.

The best advice is STILL not to spend more than you can afford to walk away from. I doubt that any water tight agreements exist that will protect a farang. If it makes you feel better to hire a lawyer and pay for useless documents go for it but don't count on being protected. I realize that many will jump on me and insist that they are protected but after many years here I have yet to see a farang get a fair shake. Life here is good but keep in mind that a farang cannot own any property other than a condo and a car.

[Heng]

On the Thai side of the issue, many Thai-Thai couples don't register their marriages until they start to have children and are beyond their asset aquisition years, so there aren't inheritance issues related to communal property for assets acquired -but have not yet been transferred- after marriage that are to be handed down to family members who aren't your children (such as siblings or other relatives).

[Dragonman]

I knew one guy who was married to a Thai lady for more than 20 years. They had several children together. The house and the pickup truck were in her name. After returning from a trip to Bangkok he found all the locks on the house changed. The police came and told him he had to leave. He returned to Bangkok and within a few days the police came and took his pickup truck. It did go to court and he was awarded half of everything. Unfortunately after several more years he is yet to get anything from her other than his clothes.

This is an intresting story on how a judge agreed with my opinion on community property laws. However was the split up prior to the Constitutional Court decision on community property, 1999. If not it is a pity there are no case law notes in Thailand. Why after all this time has he not been able to get a Court Order relating to the property?

[Gary A]

I too would like to know why he hasn't taken further action but he apparently doesn't want to talk about it. Since it is his business no one has any right to come right out and ask him. When asked if he got anything yet he gives a big harumph and waves his arms. I think because of his kids he would rather just forget it. He is not hungry and does just fine for himself. He DOESN'T pay any support.

ADDED;

It was about 2003 when the court awarded him half of the property. He was quite pleased with the ruling but since then nothing has happened.

Edited March 15, 2006 by Gary A

[Old Man River]

I know it sounds too good to be true, but I have used a law firm with an excellent reputation. They have opined that I can inherit and own both the house and land with no time limit.

As it pertains to the house, should I survive my wife, I am told that based on Community Property I would own 50% of the house and inherit the other 50% (as our Wills stipulate).

The land was acquired by my wife after 1999 and the house was also built after 1999. According to the Land Code, Sections 93 and 87, the attorney's have opined that should I survive my wife, as her legal statuatory heir, I can inherit (and own) land for residential purpose to the extent the total area does not exceed 1 rai.

I am also told that besides the lease route, another way to do this would be to transfer everything to our daughter now. Tax would have to be paid on the land transfer (which it would at some point anyway), similar to tax on a lease. My wife could then ask the court to create a Right of Habitation on the minor's property. The Right of Habitation allows rent free domicle for the life of the grantee or for a period of time not exceeding 30 years. No additional tax on the registration of the Right of Habitation would have to be paid.

Dragonman, please let me know your take on this. I obviously want to abide by the law, whatever this ends up being. While I don't ever envision anything I do ending up in court by any of our family, as our child gets it all anyway, I don't want to be in my mid 80's and find some local government official with his hand out because I am a foreigner and have documented this incorrectly. Of course, if I don't survive my wife, I guess none of this really matters as the wife is a Thai national.

Thanks,

Hi OMR. What your lawyer says is strictly correct in law. You CAN inherit the land. However this is strictly with the agreement of the Minister of Interior. As far as I am aware no Minister has yet given agreement to this, but will give agreement for you living in the property( for up to 1 year) until it is sold or transferred to a Thai.

The Right of Habitation is indeed a viable option.

While there is never anything certain, at least as far as Bangkok is concerned, the Land Department this morning said while Section 93 reads "The Minister shall...", in practise no permission or agreement is required from the Minister. This would explain why your checks on approvals by the Ministry didn't turn anything up. Perhaps the trick in alll this is not to ask.

At the end of the day, what it comes down to is whether a person is comfortable that the Land Department will take a similar view down the line or is more comfortable knowing they have at least 30 years usage of the property based on one of the structures previously discussed. By nature, I am very conservative so will opt for one of the 30 year structures.

Dragonman, as always, I appreciate your insights.

[Dragonman]

I know it sounds too good to be true, but I have used a law firm with an excellent reputation. They have opined that I can inherit and own both the house and land with no time limit.

As it pertains to the house, should I survive my wife, I am told that based on Community Property I would own 50% of the house and inherit the other 50% (as our Wills stipulate).

The land was acquired by my wife after 1999 and the house was also built after 1999. According to the Land Code, Sections 93 and 87, the attorney's have opined that should I survive my wife, as her legal statuatory heir, I can inherit (and own) land for residential purpose to the extent the total area does not exceed 1 rai.

I am also told that besides the lease route, another way to do this would be to transfer everything to our daughter now. Tax would have to be paid on the land transfer (which it would at some point anyway), similar to tax on a lease. My wife could then ask the court to create a Right of Habitation on the minor's property. The Right of Habitation allows rent free domicle for the life of the grantee or for a period of time not exceeding 30 years. No additional tax on the registration of the Right of Habitation would have to be paid.

Dragonman, please let me know your take on this. I obviously want to abide by the law, whatever this ends up being. While I don't ever envision anything I do ending up in court by any of our family, as our child gets it all anyway, I don't want to be in my mid 80's and find some local government official with his hand out because I am a foreigner and have documented this incorrectly. Of course, if I don't survive my wife, I guess none of this really matters as the wife is a Thai national.

Thanks,

Hi OMR. What your lawyer says is strictly correct in law. You CAN inherit the land. However this is strictly with the agreement of the Minister of Interior. As far as I am aware no Minister has yet given agreement to this, but will give agreement for you living in the property( for up to 1 year) until it is sold or transferred to a Thai.

The Right of Habitation is indeed a viable option.

While there is never anything certain, at least as far as Bangkok is concerned, the Land Department this morning said while Section 93 reads "The Minister shall...", in practise no permission or agreement is required from the Minister. This would explain why your checks on approvals by the Ministry didn't turn anything up. Perhaps the trick in alll this is not to ask.

At the end of the day, what it comes down to is whether a person is comfortable that the Land Department will take a similar view down the line or is more comfortable knowing they have at least 30 years usage of the property based on one of the structures previously discussed. By nature, I am very conservative so will opt for one of the 30 year structures.

Dragonman, as always, I appreciate your insights.

Ah, this is Thailand. Most Government Department's don't know the law unless it suits them. You are wise to take precautions. Next time you speak to the Land Department they will probably say there was a misunderstanding! THEY don't have to stand before the Judge and explain why the law was not followed. You or your lawyer does.