Foreign ownership regulations need to be changed, says SEC

[JOC]

The Bangkok Post's headline on the article warning of an "exodus" of Japanese investment seems a bit overblown and sensationalized, based on what the article actually says.

The article starts out talking about potentially half of Japanese companies being AFFECTED by the proposed change. But then further down in the article, in fact, the Japanese minister is quoted is saying that IF the latest FBA amendment were to pass, many of the impacted Japanese companies probably WOULD choose to surrender operational control rather than withdraw their investment from Thailand.

Meanwhile, you've got to wonder about their political sense when the same guy is quoted as saying that "no one" (in his world, prior to the latest one) expected there would be another military coup in Thailand. Has there ever been a time in Thailand's recent political history where there wasn't another one in the offing somewhere???

You "forgot" to mention, that the Japanese minister also said, that the new regulations would probably deter new companies from investing in Thailand. They would go to countries, where they were welcomed. And he mentioned Vietnam, Philippines and Myanmar!!

Thailand had a 20 year headstart, but the arrogant hare is slowly being overtaken by the turtles!!

[daveAustin]

'Thailand is for Thais'. End of.

[zaupino]

I agree with Jaidam. I am here for a long time with work permit and i will decide soon to sell all that i have here because everything has a limit. If Thailand want run together with the developped countries, must take care and consider the regulations that are in place also in those countries (Europe and USA x example).

A country can develop only using an open mind, reducing the protectionism. Otherwise ok, be and stay focus on your internal affairs but do not think for an expansion and for foreign investment.

[WhizBang]

There's a hole in your bucket dear Rusty dear Rusty---so mend it dear Rusty +++++

Oh my, I have not heard that song in such a long time. Now that brings back memories.

[CantSpell]

Total waste of potential investment so waste of further income....

For a country covered maybe at 90% by jungle and forests....

What are they afraid of?

Just regulate investment properly, would surely benefit rural and poorer areas....

[SABloke]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

For me, I like it just the way it is. We can expect to see Thailand remaining on the lower rung of the economic ladder, thus keeping it as one of the most affordable places for expats to retire. I don't care if they think they are insulting me and putting farangs down all the time. I wake up in the morning and see the poor laborers walking to the fields for 300 baht a day, knowing that my meager pension (by western standards) will continue to buy me a life I could only dream of had I not retired in Thailand. To all those in power who keep Thailand 100 years behind the times...Thank You Mak, Mak, Mak.

And the rest of us?? We're not all retirees

[Robert24]

@jabis: there are no planned changes to tighten the FBA as far as I am aware. The government already commented on this saying they would not tighten regulations in the FBA.

[Mr Somtam]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

But you are forgetting how poor and downtrodden the vast majority of Thai's actually are, they need the protectionism so that they don't get taken advantage of by all the really bad horrible greedy corrupt people outside the borders of Thailand.

Of course, it's fine for really bad horrible greedy corrupt people native to Thailand to take advantage of each other (and foreigners), but for a foreigner to do it is bad on so many levels.

The hypocrisy and double-standards here are laughable.

On another note, I know of 12 businesses in the last 6 months that have stopped being registered in Thailand and have moved to be registered in other Asian countries that don't have such stupidly blind restrictive policies. They won't ever be back no matter what Thailand does to change things and I'm sure there are many, many others.

Most working class thai people I know would love to work for a Japanese company vs a thai or Chinese company.... Everything Neatly organised, safety, clean workplace, no bullshit, honest pay for honest work. Thai and Chinese is more like slave labor. Edited November 10, 2014 by Mr Somtam

[wandasloan]

I am still waiting for evidence that any US business was intending to increase their investment in Thailand,

Why do you not go and find such evidence yourself?: It's hardly difficult. Two businesses:

16 October 2014

FORD and General Motors will headline a multi-billion-dollar expansion of the Thai car industry under a plan to turn Thailand into a global manufacturing powerhouse for small fuel-efficient vehicles by 2019.

http://goo.gl/MwrRoo

the US administration is trying to find ways of bringing back all the money that US corporations have over seas back to the US to create more jobs here before they have revolts

Yes, well, plans always are excellent until the first shot is fired. At that point, the US administrations' richest fan and arguably highest-profile shill, Warren Buffett, took his hamburger company and fled to Canada.

Back to the drawing board on finding those ways, I guess, eh?

[Thanet]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

For me, I like it just the way it is. We can expect to see Thailand remaining on the lower rung of the economic ladder, thus keeping it as one of the most affordable places for expats to retire. I don't care if they think they are insulting me and putting farangs down all the time. I wake up in the morning and see the poor laborers walking to the fields for 300 baht a day, knowing that my meager pension (by western standards) will continue to buy me a life I could only dream of had I not retired in Thailand. To all those in power who keep Thailand 100 years behind the times...Thank You Mak, Mak, Mak.

You're either joking, or you have a selfish and unkind character.

Joking aside though, I think this attitude of lording it over Thai people explains why farangs here supported the coup. Just like the generals, they want the poor to stay poor so that they can take advantage of them.

[HUAHIN62]

Losing their money is all these wealthy parasites understand. If Japan pulled out and tourism went to shit then maybe they'd learn a quick lesson, though not for long.

Agree but the poor will suffer the most.

[maidee]

21st centaury, but not yet in thailand

when will farang be able to own 1 rai of land to put his own house

so no thai golddigger can go steal it away after a few years of scam marriage ?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The Bangkok Post's headline on the article warning of an "exodus" of Japanese investment seems a bit overblown and sensationalized, based on what the article actually says.

The article starts out talking about potentially half of Japanese companies being AFFECTED by the proposed change. But then further down in the article, in fact, the Japanese minister is quoted is saying that IF the latest FBA amendment were to pass, many of the impacted Japanese companies probably WOULD choose to surrender operational control rather than withdraw their investment from Thailand.

Meanwhile, you've got to wonder about their political sense when the same guy is quoted as saying that "no one" (in his world, prior to the latest one) expected there would be another military coup in Thailand. Has there ever been a time in Thailand's recent political history where there wasn't another one in the offing somewhere???

I think the report in the Bangkokpost was rubbish. The government already commented that they are not planning to tighten the FBA. It was indeed an anti government sensationalized article.

But I would agree that the government could better articulate their strategy with regards to foreign investments and regulations about it rather than leave it to the English speaking press to make a drama about non-planned tightening of the FBA. Instead the government talks about things people care about in their daily lives like food prices, lottery tickets. I have no problems with this but bottom line is that they have limited influence over small things like this but they have a lot more influence over regulations.

I'd like to hear how the proposed changes would not affect, in such a way that I described in previous posts, running a joint venture business in thailand? Nothing sensationalizing about the fact that joint venture businesses will have to relinquish control of the whole company policy to major shareholders and nominees - as opposed to having a board of directors who go by majority votes, as it is currently the way to legally operate.

The BKK Post article did NOT say, and I didn't say, there would be no impact from the discussed change in the FBA.

But the Post headline talked about an "exodus" of businesses if enacted. And just to be clear, exodus means something that is already here leaving -- and nothing to do with future prospects staying away.

My sole point was, there's nothing in the article to support an "exodus" of current businesses. And in fact, the minister is saying many of their business would relinquish control instead of leaving. That's NO exodus.

[Old Man River]

The Bangkok Post's headline on the article warning of an "exodus" of Japanese investment seems a bit overblown and sensationalized, based on what the article actually says.

The article starts out talking about potentially half of Japanese companies being AFFECTED by the proposed change. But then further down in the article, in fact, the Japanese minister is quoted is saying that IF the latest FBA amendment were to pass, many of the impacted Japanese companies probably WOULD choose to surrender operational control rather than withdraw their investment from Thailand.

Meanwhile, you've got to wonder about their political sense when the same guy is quoted as saying that "no one" (in his world, prior to the latest one) expected there would be another military coup in Thailand. Has there ever been a time in Thailand's recent political history where there wasn't another one in the offing somewhere???

You "forgot" to mention, that the Japanese minister also said, that the new regulations would probably deter new companies from investing in Thailand. They would go to countries, where they were welcomed. And he mentioned Vietnam, Philippines and Myanmar!!

Thailand had a 20 year headstart, but the arrogant hare is slowly being overtaken by the turtles!!

Not just new companies, but additional investment by existing foreign companies.

VN will be the big winner.

[Thai at Heart]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

For me, I like it just the way it is. We can expect to see Thailand remaining on the lower rung of the economic ladder, thus keeping it as one of the most affordable places for expats to retire. I don't care if they think they are insulting me and putting farangs down all the time. I wake up in the morning and see the poor laborers walking to the fields for 300 baht a day, knowing that my meager pension (by western standards) will continue to buy me a life I could only dream of had I not retired in Thailand. To all those in power who keep Thailand 100 years behind the times...Thank You Mak, Mak, Mak.

What a wonderful selfless human being you are. You should be so proud!

So you are OK which I am pleased for you. Changing those practices that will help them poor labourers from earning 300 Baht will not affect you so much. You should be ashamed of yourself. Maybe Karma will deal you the hand that the poor labourers get. Lets see if then you thank those in power for keeping the country 100 years behind the times. Mak Mak

It is not his fault that the thais persist in pursuing non wealth creating policies.

[jabis]

The Bangkok Post's headline on the article warning of an "exodus" of Japanese investment seems a bit overblown and sensationalized, based on what the article actually says.

The article starts out talking about potentially half of Japanese companies being AFFECTED by the proposed change. But then further down in the article, in fact, the Japanese minister is quoted is saying that IF the latest FBA amendment were to pass, many of the impacted Japanese companies probably WOULD choose to surrender operational control rather than withdraw their investment from Thailand.

Meanwhile, you've got to wonder about their political sense when the same guy is quoted as saying that "no one" (in his world, prior to the latest one) expected there would be another military coup in Thailand. Has there ever been a time in Thailand's recent political history where there wasn't another one in the offing somewhere???

I think the report in the Bangkokpost was rubbish. The government already commented that they are not planning to tighten the FBA. It was indeed an anti government sensationalized article.

But I would agree that the government could better articulate their strategy with regards to foreign investments and regulations about it rather than leave it to the English speaking press to make a drama about non-planned tightening of the FBA. Instead the government talks about things people care about in their daily lives like food prices, lottery tickets. I have no problems with this but bottom line is that they have limited influence over small things like this but they have a lot more influence over regulations.

I'd like to hear how the proposed changes would not affect, in such a way that I described in previous posts, running a joint venture business in thailand? Nothing sensationalizing about the fact that joint venture businesses will have to relinquish control of the whole company policy to major shareholders and nominees - as opposed to having a board of directors who go by majority votes, as it is currently the way to legally operate.

The BKK Post article did NOT say, and I didn't say, there would be no impact from the discussed change in the FBA.

But the Post headline talked about an "exodus" of businesses if enacted. And just to be clear, exodus means something that is already here leaving -- and nothing to do with future prospects staying away.

My sole point was, there's nothing in the article to support an "exodus" of current businesses. And in fact, the minister is saying many of their business would relinquish control instead of leaving. That's NO exodus.

As to your points;

Not true that impact would affect the businesses

- the ones not touched by the amendment are => foreign businesses which operate under international agreements(meaning US), businesses that have representative offices in Thailand(meaning just that - a branch office) and businesses that have been given BOI (Board Of Investment)-status.

True that many of the non-excluded companies will try to find an alternative method, or rather another loophole, to regain control of the "branch" asset - and as the legislation currently does not hold such a loophole - the most propable, and easiest, reasoning would be to relocate the aforementioned business to neighbouring country - except when you're holding a manufacturing facility - no? As per the BP article, Japanese hold almost half of all the abroad finance injected to Thailand - would you not concider this an implosion then?

Edited November 10, 2014 by jabis

[Bernard Flint]

Personally, I think the Thais have got this one right.

Some decades ago now, 'my' home country, Scotland, was sold off in huge lots to foreign buyers, particularly from Japan. Now a lot of Scotland is owned by non-Scots and it is my opinion that this should not have been allowed.

Is it ok for you to go to Wales, Ireland or England to own property

[Thailand]

The government won't even understand it. They are soldiers, not politicians or civil servants in that field.

It's like putting a welder in charge of an ice cream factory.

I have met many extremely capable soldiers in my time that were intelligent, humane, honourable, analytical and wonderful leaders, qualities that would put most politicians or civil servants to shame.

Just because they wear boots, doesn't make them incompetent in politics.

We will find out won't we. Most of the senior ones are now in government and associated committees.

All worked out well on previous occasions when the same thing happened- not!

[Arkady]

There was a disruption in the trading of Bangkok Bank shares a couple of weeks ago and the price went down as it hit its own NVDR limit of 35% which meant that foreigners couldn't buy any more shares in the market, except on the foreign board which many institutions won't do as liquidity is less and the foreign stock trades at a small premium. That is Bangkok Bank's fault because it dropped it foreign ownership limit to 35% after having a higher one (40% I think) when it desperately had to raise capital after the 1997 financial crisis. Both Kbank and BBL are around 70% foreign owned, including non-voting NVDRs but Kbank has a the maximum allowed foreign ownership limit of 49% and thus avoids this problem.

On the general issue. Yes, it is ludicrous to maintain an antiquated foreign business law, most of which was first legislated as a revolutionary decree under the Thanom-Prapat military dictatorship in 1972, when the rest of the region including former communist neighbours has liberalised.

[Expat1]

One must look at the history of this place. This a cartel based and controlled economy having grown out of the old tax farm system. The major leading cartels have no wish for foreigners to come here and express any control on investment and they definitely do no want any outside interference or agitation on the financial front. It has virtually nothing to do with politicians, soldiers, etc and until this is addressed nothing will change here and the world will simply pass them by. And those aforementioned shall be quite happy about it.

[Arkady]

The feudal land system in Scotland was abolished in 2004.

Personally, I think the Thai way is a bit OTT, but on the other hand, it does stop wealthy Japanese buying the whole country. (Have heard Australians complain about that in Oz...)

From an economic perspective, it's either short-sighted in that it reduces foreign investment, or incredibly long-sighted, in that it holds property prices down at a level where normal Thais can still afford a place to live in Bangkok.

You are right thanks for clarifying the present rather than the history walk we were on.

I don't see that permitting foreign land title is instrumental in attracting foreign businesses. And in fact simply providing lease hold titles for land usage under primary commercial use would meet most peoples needs. While baring the the transfer of leases into residential use may address concerns of property developers coming on the scene and heating up the market for example.

Singapore allows strata title for personal holdings and lease hold to a local corp for land if I recall correctly. And this seems to work.

the land issue is a distraction from much more important Fba topics.

Indeed. The topic is about business ownership, not land ownership which is a separate but related issue. Probably not being allowed freehold land ownership does not affect most foreign direct investment, as most prefer to rent property. However, to be competitive they should allow longer leases than the current 30 year maximum, say 70 plus. Not sure what the logic behind the 30 year lease is but it applies equally to Thais and is in the still current 1954 Land Code and was probably in force before that.

What is a real issue is that very few foreign service sector companies will want to come and set up a business under the proposed amendments to the FBA for these reasons:

1) They can't have management control of their own businesses in any shape or form. That means they can't protect their brand names, technology, service quality or reputations.

2) If the Thai affiliate is part of a global or regional network, the foreign investors won't be able to guarantee that it will fulfill its role to the standard required.

3) It will be very difficult to find Thai investors who have enough capital to invest and have the expertise to manage the businesses.

Although the issue is raised here by the SEC it is more an issue for foreign direct investment, as there are very few foreign controlled service sector companies listed on the SEC and generally the issue for foreign portfolio investment can be circumvented through the use of NVDRs. However, that is not ethical because portfolio investors have a fiduciary responsibility to vote their shares and should avoid non-voting shares wherever possible. Thus NVDRs can only be regarded as a temporary fix, albeit one that has worked well for many years.

Looking at BBL for example, you can see that it is not a satisfactory situation that 35% of the share capital is held through NVDRs and effectively disenfranchised, while the voting rights of the remaining 65% of the capital are enhanced, creating a distortion. In the same way that the Commerce Ministry is saying it needs to protect Thai shareholders in foreign jvs who (on paper) own the majority of share capital but cannot get management control, the same is true of shareholders in listed stocks like BBL and KBANK. Foreigners own 70% of both but cannot exercise any voting rights in about half of that shareholding. If they were forced down to less than 50% the share prices would collapse which would damage Thai pensions and other funds, but clearly Thais don't have the money or the inclination to buy 50% or more of these famous Thai banks. So how can the Commerce Ministry imagine that real Thai shareholders will be found for all the foreign jv companies, most of which will have more uncertain returns than BBL and KBANK?

[DJVillain]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

In the '90s my first landlady in Bkk was very rich, had a royal title and I learned from the estate agent she only rented to foreigners.

When I met her to get the seal of approval she made it clear that renting was all foreigners should ever be permitted to do but later in the conversation spoke of the property and bank account she had in the London area. i discreetly suggested the situation should be more balanced and her attitude was if foreign govts permit it should be taken advantage of but it must never happen in LoS.

Says it all really.

Its quite simple then...

Breed with them.... Spread your seed.... Mix genetics and ethnicities.... Then take your children back to your country of origin for a better level of education and healthcare until they come of age to get a Thai passport (whilst secretly keeping there other one)... and then have your child do everything as a Thai... Slowly but surely, after many generations, your family and birthright can take Thailand from under the feet of the sneaky Thais....

Mwahahahaha....

[Arkady]

One must look at the history of this place. This a cartel based and controlled economy having grown out of the old tax farm system. The major leading cartels have no wish for foreigners to come here and express any control on investment and they definitely do no want any outside interference or agitation on the financial front. It has virtually nothing to do with politicians, soldiers, etc and until this is addressed nothing will change here and the world will simply pass them by. And those aforementioned shall be quite happy about it.

You overlook the point that several Thai commercial banks are legally majority owned and controlled by foreigners: Bank of Ayudhya, Standard Chartered Bank, OUB, CIMB. When the economy was effectively bankrupted in 1997 the government had no choice but to allow foreign banks to come in and take over Thai banks. That thinking is now entrenched since foreign banks are still allowed to come and make banking acquisitions, e.g. BAY and CIMB in the last few years.

The banking sector is an interesting example since foreign investment there illustrates that foreign appetite is somewhat limited as no one has ever shown an interest in going after a large Thai bank. Also foreign owners have tended to enhance the banks they buy into with new technology and training and will often sell out again when they need the cash or the Thai subsidiary is no longer a fit with their strategy, e.g. ABN AMRO sold Bank of Asia to OUB and GE Capital sold out of Bank of Ayudya to Bank of Tokyo. The fact that foreigners tend to flip investments after a few years provides the opportunity for the target banks to revert to Thai ownership, even though this has not happened thus far.

The results of the forced opening of the banking sector to foreign acquisitions should encourage Thais to want to open up the rest of the service sector. In addition the forced opening of the retail sector to foreign investors to prevent business closures and mass redundancies has also been encouraging. Foreigners created businesses that Thai consumers love to shop by creating value for them in place of the inefficient, overpriced Thai retail sector that existed before (if anyone can still remember it). Makro, after being developed by its Dutch owners has now reverted to Thai ownership.

[Thanet]

One must look at the history of this place. This a cartel based and controlled economy having grown out of the old tax farm system. The major leading cartels have no wish for foreigners to come here and express any control on investment and they definitely do no want any outside interference or agitation on the financial front. It has virtually nothing to do with politicians, soldiers, etc and until this is addressed nothing will change here and the world will simply pass them by. And those aforementioned shall be quite happy about it.

You overlook the point that several Thai commercial banks are legally majority owned and controlled by foreigners: Bank of Ayudhya, Standard Chartered Bank, OUB, CIMB. When the economy was effectively bankrupted in 1997 the government had no choice but to allow foreign banks to come in and take over Thai banks. That thinking is now entrenched since foreign banks are still allowed to come and make banking acquisitions, e.g. BAY and CIMB in the last few years.

The banking sector is an interesting example since foreign investment there illustrates that foreign appetite is somewhat limited as no one has ever shown an interest in going after a large Thai bank. Also foreign owners have tended to enhance the banks they buy into with new technology and training and will often sell out again when they need the cash or the Thai subsidiary is no longer a fit with their strategy, e.g. ABN AMRO sold Bank of Asia to OUB and GE Capital sold out of Bank of Ayudya to Bank of Tokyo. The fact that foreigners tend to flip investments after a few years provides the opportunity for the target banks to revert to Thai ownership, even though this has not happened thus far.

The results of the forced opening of the banking sector to foreign acquisitions should encourage Thais to want to open up the rest of the service sector. In addition the forced opening of the retail sector to foreign investors to prevent business closures and mass redundancies has also been encouraging. Foreigners created businesses that Thai consumers love to shop by creating value for them in place of the inefficient, overpriced Thai retail sector that existed before (if anyone can still remember it). Makro, after being developed by its Dutch owners has now reverted to Thai ownership.

Some very interesting points made here. Now I wonder why no one has ever shown interest in going after a large Thai bank ...

Makes me feel that I made the right decision in keeping all my money overseas, and sending the money I make here overseas too

[flakes]

Yes,

Good idea let begin with the ownership of land to be changed in a more foreigner friendly way!!

[icare999]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

im forang and agree that forages should not own land here and rest of regulations ITs not the same sol stop pretending it is. Rich west people could and would come here and buy up all they can leaving thais with nothing. Same as rich London people have bought up cottages in UK so now local people can no longer afford a home. My This wife has property in UK and USA but she's quite wealthy and is not depriving a local from a home. The people depriving UK people of thru own home are UK citizens doing buy to let not foreigners buying up property except maybe in London. At moment here at least outside centres of Bangkok a most home can be bought by many Thais with a fairly low income of say 15000 pm ++. LEt forang come here unimpeded and that would soon not be the case

[Kaalle]

I've had this conversation before with a few Thai People, and 99 percent of them, don't want Foreigners to own anything, ??? But they are happy to own stuff abroad if they live in that Country.

I explained to them that , that was the same, but they could not see it ???

For me, it would be a Great start if they could move into the 21st Century and clean the place up, in all respects....

For me, I like it just the way it is. We can expect to see Thailand remaining on the lower rung of the economic ladder, thus keeping it as one of the most affordable places for expats to retire. I don't care if they think they are insulting me and putting farangs down all the time. I wake up in the morning and see the poor laborers walking to the fields for 300 baht a day, knowing that my meager pension (by western standards) will continue to buy me a life I could only dream of had I not retired in Thailand. To all those in power who keep Thailand 100 years behind the times...Thank You Mak, Mak, Mak.

What a wonderful selfless human being you are. You should be so proud!

So you are OK which I am pleased for you. Changing those practices that will help them poor labourers from earning 300 Baht will not affect you so much. You should be ashamed of yourself. Maybe Karma will deal you the hand that the poor labourers get. Lets see if then you thank those in power for keeping the country 100 years behind the times. Mak Mak

He is just being honest, we all care about our self's first and foremost and we don't exactly go out of our ways to help anybody outside our circle of friends and family in any way. I am convinced you wouldn't abstain from much comfort and convenience in your daily life to help others, but maybe I am wrong.

[Robert24]

One must look at the history of this place. This a cartel based and controlled economy having grown out of the old tax farm system. The major leading cartels have no wish for foreigners to come here and express any control on investment and they definitely do no want any outside interference or agitation on the financial front. It has virtually nothing to do with politicians, soldiers, etc and until this is addressed nothing will change here and the world will simply pass them by. And those aforementioned shall be quite happy about it.

You overlook the point that several Thai commercial banks are legally majority owned and controlled by foreigners: Bank of Ayudhya, Standard Chartered Bank, OUB, CIMB. When the economy was effectively bankrupted in 1997 the government had no choice but to allow foreign banks to come in and take over Thai banks. That thinking is now entrenched since foreign banks are still allowed to come and make banking acquisitions, e.g. BAY and CIMB in the last few years.

The banking sector is an interesting example since foreign investment there illustrates that foreign appetite is somewhat limited as no one has ever shown an interest in going after a large Thai bank. Also foreign owners have tended to enhance the banks they buy into with new technology and training and will often sell out again when they need the cash or the Thai subsidiary is no longer a fit with their strategy, e.g. ABN AMRO sold Bank of Asia to OUB and GE Capital sold out of Bank of Ayudya to Bank of Tokyo. The fact that foreigners tend to flip investments after a few years provides the opportunity for the target banks to revert to Thai ownership, even though this has not happened thus far.

The results of the forced opening of the banking sector to foreign acquisitions should encourage Thais to want to open up the rest of the service sector. In addition the forced opening of the retail sector to foreign investors to prevent business closures and mass redundancies has also been encouraging. Foreigners created businesses that Thai consumers love to shop by creating value for them in place of the inefficient, overpriced Thai retail sector that existed before (if anyone can still remember it). Makro, after being developed by its Dutch owners has now reverted to Thai ownership.

Some very interesting points made here. Now I wonder why no one has ever shown interest in going after a large Thai bank ...

Makes me feel that I made the right decision in keeping all my money overseas, and sending the money I make here overseas too

I guess you missed out on Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi taking over BAY. Or UOB buying the Asset management Unit from ING Thailand to build out UOB AM Thailand.

There are also rumors that the government is keen to reduce/sell their stake in TMB. Also there are rumors that ANZ or OCBC being interested in getting a banking license in Thailand through an acquisition. I think more M&A activity to come in the Financial sector in Thailand.

[jcisco]

Is anyone else here interested to see opening up of protected sectors to foreign corporations. Over 40 years of protection leaves large SME n up opportunities to advance these areas along with shaking up the existing players, which would improve products and services for the average Thai. Profits aside, I'm am hoping this money press and source of bad service,quality and convenience is finally quashed.

[siampolee]

Its quite simple then...

DJVillian post # 82
Breed with them.... Spread your seed.... Mix genetics and ethnicities.... Then take your children back to your country of origin for a better level of education and healthcare until they come of age to get a Thai passport (whilst secretly keeping there other one)... and then have your child do everything as a Thai... Slowly but surely, after many generations, your family and birthright can take Thailand from under the feet of the sneaky Thais....

Mwahahahaha....

And that my friend is exactly the method used by the Chinese communities over the years to make themselves into the ''New Thai's.''

They are in fact the very people who are in favour of the F,B,A, and they do not want to see any changes that may impede their slow relentless glacier speed takeover of the country.

http://www.thailawforum.com/blog/chinese-assimilation-in-thailand-vs-malaysia

Edited November 10, 2014 by siampolee