Foreign ownership regulations need to be changed, says SEC

[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.

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.

I did mention Bank of Tokyo's acquisition of BAY, if you read carefully. Yes, there are several other examples in the asset management and securities sectors but I was only talking about the banking and retail sectors as they have the highest impact on the economy.

The Commerce Ministry's plan is to try to take credit for liberalising those financial sectors by removing them the FBA restricted list, even they have never come under the FBA or the MoC, as the are all under special laws enforced by the Finance Industry. Pathetically transparent tactic that will fool no one.

Incidentally the U.S. position has always been to push for totally open access to financial services, meaning that US banks etc should just be able to come and register a Thai subsidiary without having to apply for any regulatory approval at all. Thaksin had agreed to that in the FTA negotiations before they collapsed amidst a backlash in Thailand. U.S. Firms already have access to 100% ownership in services except finance and logistics thro the treaty but that could be terminated at some point.

[firestar]

The Nation hasn't published a single article I know of about the Government's proposal on TIGHTENING the foreign ownership laws.

Oh no wouldn't want the pay masters to look bad but this hand-picked piece makes it straight to paper and my TV newsletter?!?

Unbelievable. If confirmation was ever needed The Nation really is nothing more than a mouthpiece. masquerading as news.

Edited November 10, 2014 by firestar

[Thai at Heart]

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.

I did mention Bank of Tokyo's acquisition of BAY, if you read carefully. Yes, there are several other examples in the asset management and securities sectors but I was only talking about the banking and retail sectors as they have the highest impact on the economy.

The Commerce Ministry's plan is to try to take credit for liberalising those financial sectors by removing them the FBA restricted list, even they have never come under the FBA or the MoC, as the are all under special laws enforced by the Finance Industry. Pathetically transparent tactic that will fool no one.

Incidentally the U.S. position has always been to push for totally open access to financial services, meaning that US banks etc should just be able to come and register a Thai subsidiary without having to apply for any regulatory approval at all. Thaksin had agreed to that in the FTA negotiations before they collapsed amidst a backlash in Thailand. U.S. Firms already have access to 100% ownership in services except finance and logistics thro the treaty but that could be terminated at some point.

Thaksin granting that was what spawned the PAD with the daughter of Bangkok bank marching side by side with Sondhi when they went into government house.

She rapidly went into the background. The PAD had nothing to do with stopping corruption and everything to do with protecting Thai Chinese oligopoly in all markets.

[Old Man River]

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.

Japanese companies (among others) are very nervous. The acquisitions you mention were done before the proposed amendments. The rumors you mention started before the proposed amendments.

The amendments target the service industry, which will affect many Japanese companies which service Thai based production facilities. Japanese companies make decisions out of Tokyo. Normally their senior management in smaller countries like Thailand provide info to home office, but have little actual decision making authority. Losing decision making control in Tokyo will have a major impact on these companies, no matter how much they trust their local partners. It's a cultural thing.

[NCC1701A]

Thailand for Thais!

[Time Traveller]

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.

Too funny...she's too stupid to realize she's the one being taken advantage of. If people like her are gullable enough and think they are so smart then western governments can and do take advantage of the sitaution by selling overpriced real estate.to these rich foreigners.

That thailand has these laws is great for nations like America and UK. Everytime countries like Thailand restricts foreign ownership of assets and investment, it makes it that much easier for western nations to attract foreign investment and capital into their countries. This is the advantage that Western nations will always have over 3rd world nations like Thailand which exist mostly as rent based economies. Even xenophobic Japan knows the advantage of an open economy and not restricting foreign investment.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Time Traveller

[Moowon]

It's good though like back home it's hard to get a house as they've gon up so much as loads of Chinese buyin em wich is U fare ain't it

[Moowon]

It's good though like back home it's hard to get a house as they've gon up so much as loads of Chinese buyin em wich is U fare ain't it

[PaullyW]

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

I'm forang, too, and i have many forage friends. All forages should beware.

[PaullyW]

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.

Japanese companies (among others) are very nervous. The acquisitions you mention were done before the proposed amendments. The rumors you mention started before the proposed amendments.

The amendments target the service industry, which will affect many Japanese companies which service Thai based production facilities. Japanese companies make decisions out of Tokyo. Normally their senior management in smaller countries like Thailand provide info to home office, but have little actual decision making authority. Losing decision making control in Tokyo will have a major impact on these companies, no matter how much they trust their local partners. It's a cultural thing.

I agree. I have a couple of Japanese country manager drinking friends, and I assure you that on average they would definitely NOT trust their Thai partners to run the show as it were. You'd be surprised how little trust that they have for them in fact. As we know, the Japanese are Asians, so they are a bit more indirect and less public about their criticism, but they are far from naive and can see all the same problems Western business people see.

[whybother]

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.

I thought most of Scotland was already owned by the English.

[Dogmatix]

A Thai English language paper today has as its front page headline something about Prayut asking foreigners to invest more in Thailand. On the same page is an article about foreign embassies getting together to protest the government's planned amendments to the FBA.

Why would anyone want to bring in investment capital, expat staff, technology, training, reputation, brand name and a global network and then not have management control over their own business?

The effects of this new FBA will be as bad as the capital controls introduced by the last military government.

[Time Traveller]

A Thai English language paper today has as its front page headline something about Prayut asking foreigners to invest more in Thailand. On the same page is an article about foreign embassies getting together to protest the government's planned amendments to the FBA.

Their policies seem contradictory, but there could be a reason for this....The (unspoken) word is that the Junta government want foreign investors from countries that support the military coup - namely China/Russia - and at the same time make it more difficult for investors from countries that didn't support the coup, ie. USA, Japan, Australia, The EU and UK.

The military had the most weapons and were able to sieze the country successfully so they are entitlted to do whatever they like I guess, but they really are moving the nation slowly down the road of North Korea with the stupid changes they are making....everytime you give preferential treatment to friends is one further step away from improving your economic living standards.

Incidently, that article mentioned the Capital Controls introduced by the 2007 military government and the disaster it caused, showing just how out of touch the miitary is with the effects of all the changes they are planning..

While Thailand might not need western investors, but seems they don't realize foreign investors don't need thailand either. There's plenty of places to invest now with better returns and less political risk. So change the FBA or don't change it, the only one effected will be Thailand.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Time Traveller

[gemini81]

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.

I thought most of Scotland was already owned by the English.

We're owned by international bank cartels. That's the truth unfortunately.

[Dogmatix]

A Thai English language paper today has as its front page headline something about Prayut asking foreigners to invest more in Thailand. On the same page is an article about foreign embassies getting together to protest the government's planned amendments to the FBA.

Their policies seem contradictory, but there could be a reason for this....The (unspoken) word is that the Junta government want foreign investors from countries that support the military coup - namely China/Russia - and at the same time make it more difficult for investors from countries that didn't support the coup, ie. USA, Japan, Australia, The EU and UK.

The military had the most weapons and were able to sieze the country successfully so they are entitlted to do whatever they like I guess, but they really are moving the nation slowly down the road of North Korea with the stupid changes they are making....everytime you give preferential treatment to friends is one further step away from improving your economic living standards.

Incidently, that article mentioned the Capital Controls introduced by the 2007 military government and the disaster it caused, showing just how out of touch the miitary is with the effects of all the changes they are planning..

While Thailand might not need western investors, but seems they don't realize foreign investors don't need thailand either. There's plenty of places to invest now with better returns and less political risk. So change the FBA or don't change it, the only one effected will be Thailand.

I don't think the junta came up with this ridiculous idea for themselves and it will hardly benefit Chinese and Russian investors. However, if the cabinet agrees to sponsor it as a government bill, it is theirs and it will probably get through. In 2007 the SME lobby at the Thai Chamber pushed the NLA to tighten up the bill which was definitely the Sarayud govt's idea on that occasion. The clauses the NLA added made the Sarayud government get cold feet and they pulled the bill. Now it is back and seems to be essentially the version that the Sarayud government pulled with the additional obnoxious clauses added. Now the protectionist lobby sees its last chance to tighten up the FBA before the AEC comes in and then they will try to make it as difficult as possible for ASEAN nationals to benefit from the agreement in Thailand.

Perhaps the junta just sees it as a way to score some cheap points with the masses by pushing the nationalism button, even though it will only benefit a small number of families who own grossly inefficient businesses ripping off Thai consumers and are quite rightly worried about foreign competition. It is now clear that no meaningful reform is on the table. Even there are heap of reforms that would please the hell out of red and yellow shirts alike - reform of the police and courts, decentralisation of provincial administration, modernisation of education etc - none of these are going to happen because they are seen as threatening to vested interests that like things just the way they are.

Things like the FBA and inheritance tax may be needed to show some sort of achievements, even most Thais will get no benefit from either and will actually be harmed by the FBA. Sad.

[Thai at Heart]

A Thai English language paper today has as its front page headline something about Prayut asking foreigners to invest more in Thailand. On the same page is an article about foreign embassies getting together to protest the government's planned amendments to the FBA.

Their policies seem contradictory, but there could be a reason for this....The (unspoken) word is that the Junta government want foreign investors from countries that support the military coup - namely China/Russia - and at the same time make it more difficult for investors from countries that didn't support the coup, ie. USA, Japan, Australia, The EU and UK.

The military had the most weapons and were able to sieze the country successfully so they are entitlted to do whatever they like I guess, but they really are moving the nation slowly down the road of North Korea with the stupid changes they are making....everytime you give preferential treatment to friends is one further step away from improving your economic living standards.

Incidently, that article mentioned the Capital Controls introduced by the 2007 military government and the disaster it caused, showing just how out of touch the miitary is with the effects of all the changes they are planning..

While Thailand might not need western investors, but seems they don't realize foreign investors don't need thailand either. There's plenty of places to invest now with better returns and less political risk. So change the FBA or don't change it, the only one effected will be Thailand.

I don't think the junta came up with this ridiculous idea for themselves and it will hardly benefit Chinese and Russian investors. However, if the cabinet agrees to sponsor it as a government bill, it is theirs and it will probably get through. In 2007 the SME lobby at the Thai Chamber pushed the NLA to tighten up the bill which was definitely the Sarayud govt's idea on that occasion. The clauses the NLA added made the Sarayud government get cold feet and they pulled the bill. Now it is back and seems to be essentially the version that the Sarayud government pulled with the additional obnoxious clauses added. Now the protectionist lobby sees its last chance to tighten up the FBA before the AEC comes in and then they will try to make it as difficult as possible for ASEAN nationals to benefit from the agreement in Thailand.

Perhaps the junta just sees it as a way to score some cheap points with the masses by pushing the nationalism button, even though it will only benefit a small number of families who own grossly inefficient businesses ripping off Thai consumers and are quite rightly worried about foreign competition. It is now clear that no meaningful reform is on the table. Even there are heap of reforms that would please the hell out of red and yellow shirts alike - reform of the police and courts, decentralisation of provincial administration, modernisation of education etc - none of these are going to happen because they are seen as threatening to vested interests that like things just the way they are.

Things like the FBA and inheritance tax may be needed to show some sort of achievements, even most Thais will get no benefit from either and will actually be harmed by the FBA. Sad.

The FBA is restrictive enough as it is, and all it serves is to dissuade more FDI into the Thai market, and to prevent competition which would benefit the Thai consumer and primary producers who are beholden to cartels in just about every market in Thailand.

All anyone has to ask anyone proposing to tighten the FBA has to ask, WHat is in it for Somchai? Nada.

[German Viking]

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.

"They will be measured on their deeds not on their speeches"

[German Viking]

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.

ah Scotland permitted foreign free hold sorta ownership oops, probably about as a big a screw up as the unregulated feudal system they land ownership exists under.

Westminster has been trying to drag Scotland to the 21 st century and entirely failed due to intransigent Scotland. And your complaining that the land is in foreign hands, the Scotland land case is an exceptional example as the last frontier of backwards all you can eat land acquisitions left in Europe or anywhere relevant. Most countries are a little more protective of their dirt than than cash n carry Scotland.

Bring some regulation to the environment claim back your land and be happy, won't get fixed till you fix yourself own system first.

As long I know it is in germany no restriction that a foreigner can buy land.

Anyway I would make restrictions, but not so hard as in Thailand.

For example I would allow for foreigner in Thailand to buy 1 rai to build in peace a house on it, for sure not more to avoid speculations.

For Companies I would also allow to buy land, but only for factories in a good balance to the amount of employees not for speculations also.

Back to germany for example Nokia sourced in 2008 his production out to Romania. They got when they opend the factory in germany 80 Mill. Euros in aid I would let pay them all this back + interest and would confiscate their land and would give them for the land only the value they paid for it.

I would do this with any company who got benefits from the country not only to foreign companies.

http://www.mgovworld.org/News/anti-nokia-backlash-grows-in-germany/

[German Viking]

There is lot more than simple freehold land ownership in the FBA, now to be tightened even more. It can only backfire as the investors lose confidence in the security of their assets once more. Can't imagine - for example let's say Toyota - to keep manufacturing goods in TH soil if the mother company has to relinquish full control over to local dealers. How can for example quality assurance and after sales departments work with the same standards, if the local branch is not accountable to the brand company?

A lot of questions, even in the media, that I think Japanese rarely raise - so deep concearn about the future has been voiced out by a trading partner for several decades - I see it as a warning sign.

You are wrong look what was happend in germany in 2008 with Nokia they had no restrictions in top 80 Mill in aid nobody could imagine that they would source out, but they did for only 1 simple reason more profit.

http://www.mgovworld.org/News/anti-nokia-backlash-grows-in-germany/

[wilcopops]

It's reported elsewhere that a senior Japanese diplomat in BKK has warned that if the plans to tighten the provisions of the Foreign Business Act go ahead at least half of the Japanese companies here will be waving ' Bye ' Bye.

Will the govt pay any attention or will face, bravado and ' never happen ' attitudes prevail and the risk is taken ?

Not so long ago a Thai official said companies in Europe were in trouble and Thai investors should get in there and fill their boots.

Completely different of course.

Pridiyathorn - isn't this the same guy who the Chinese called an incompetent flip-flopper when he caused hate crash under the last coup govt?

from Wiki...

"Pridiyathorn instituted capital controls to attempt to reverse a strengthening of the baht, but reversed the measure after the Thai stock market crashed, destroying US$20 billion of market value in one day. Pridiyathorn later noted that “This was not a mistake. Measures always have side effects. Once we knew the side effects, we quickly fixed it.... Just one day of stocks falling is not considered much damage.”"

"Bratin Sanyal, head of Asian equity investments at ING in Hong Kong noted, "The one thing worse than an incompetent central bank is an incompetent central bank that flip-flops." Catherine Tan, head of Asia Emerging Markets at Forecast in Singapore, noted, "They are proving themselves to be very unprofessional. Their actions are very irresponsible. They have totally lost credibility... I don't see foreigners returning to Thailand any time in the near future. Markets now have no confidence in the government."^[15] The Export-Import Bank of Thailand also criticized the capital controls."

Sounds familiar?

To be fair this was 2007 and Pridiyathorn already mentioned that they are not going to try to tighten the FBA since he has seen the negative impacts from the measures implemented in 2007.

And by the way foreigners have returned to Thailand in a big way since 2007 despite some the broker's comments above.

"he has seen the negative impacts from the measures implemented in 2007." - which HE implemented?