Purchase Of Land/houses Through "farang 49% Companies"

[Mobi]

Excuse me if this has been discussed recently -The search facility in TV is the only naff part of the whole set up - and if so, you please redirect me.

Does anyone know the latest on the "farang 49% company owning land" saga? Has the situation eased, or are the land offices still refusing to accept transfer of land into such compnies?

the last I heard was that the lawyers were all advising buyers to set up a 100% Thai owned company to buy the house, and then transfer the shares to the new farang owner after the land has been transferred. Is this still the case?

The local lawyers were also advising that farangs with existing 49% companies could sell their houses to another farang by transferring the shares. Is this still the 'advice on the street'?

I am seriously considering transferring my house to my wife with a 30 year lease back, as I don't think the 49% company route is the best way to go in the long term, regardless of current practice, but would just like to know what is going on at the moment before doing so.

Thanks.

[Clipper747]

Excuse me if this has been discussed recently -The search facility in TV is the only naff part of the whole set up - and if so, you please redirect me.

Does anyone know the latest on the "farang 49% company owning land" saga? Has the situation eased, or are the land offices still refusing to accept transfer of land into such compnies?

the last I heard was that the lawyers were all advising buyers to set up a 100% Thai owned company to buy the house, and then transfer the shares to the new farang owner after the land has been transferred. Is this still the case?

The local lawyers were also advising that farangs with existing 49% companies could sell their houses to another farang by transferring the shares. Is this still the 'advice on the street'?

I am seriously considering transferring my house to my wife with a 30 year lease back, as I don't think the 49% company route is the best way to go in the long term, regardless of current practice, but would just like to know what is going on at the moment before doing so.

Thanks.

Hello:

2 weeks ago I was able to transfer my land and house to my company, I had no problems, See the post I did. My company is 49% . The problem was companies being form to buy real estate. If this is not your case then you won't have any touble.

Good luck

[donx]

2 weeks ago I was able to transfer my land and house to my company, I had no problems, See the post I did. My company is 49% . The problem was companies being form to buy real estate. If this is not your case then you won't have any touble.

Good luck

What type of business does your company do?

[Mobi]

Hello:

2 weeks ago I was able to transfer my land and house to my company, I had no problems, See the post I did. My company is 49% . The problem was companies being form to buy real estate. If this is not your case then you won't have any touble.

Good luck

Hi Clipper, I've found your thread now, thanks. Very interesting.

I wonder how many houses are transferred to farangs through the Bangkok Land Office? I would have though most of the farangs would be buying houses in the tourist areas - Pattaya, Hua Hin, Pukhet, Samui etc. and up country in their wives' backyards.

Has anyone else had any recent experience at other land offices, post crackdown?

Sunbelt certainly sounds like the experts on this, I might give them a visit when I go to Bangkok.

[animatic]

2 weeks ago I was able to transfer my land and house to my company, I had no problems, See the post I did. My company is 49% . The problem was companies being form to buy real estate. If this is not your case then you won't have any touble.

Good luck

Hi Clipper, I've found your thread now, thanks. Very interesting.

I wonder how many houses are transferred to farangs through the Bangkok Land Office? I would have though most of the farangs would be buying houses in the tourist areas - Pattaya, Hua Hin, Pukhet, Samui etc. and up country in their wives' backyards.

Has anyone else had any recent experience at other land offices, post crackdown?

I bought my land this late winter/early spring.

I saw informed that the Land office investigation was in progress at that time.

Of course only AFTER the thing went public...

It apparently slowed the process some, but if you were "clean",

as I was, it goes through OK.

I had a shared full Chanote for 2 rai with a partner 49% company,

and now have 1 rai in my 49% company. So I have been through

2 chanote processes this spring on Samui, no issues.

I DID go back to my land conveyancer recently and ask if the guys

in big trouble now, had any fingers / signatures etc. in my transfer,

they did not. For warnewd is for armed as it were.

They are mostly interested in big realestate developers

coming in an pushing out Thai partners, or buying big plots

and rigging the lower level titles; sor kor etc,

on large parcels and then making a bundle on their sale.

Like The Peak is accused of. I live next village over,

and cursed these guys half-built road all winter.

A total wash out and road hazard...

The little guys buying a rai or 2 and settling in aren't the issue.

But I think they will be looking closer at cash sources in the future.

Certianly the Land Office will be on it's toes in the future.

But the general scare seems to have been over blown.

But that doesn't mean "the chattering classes" will not bloviate endlessly.

[monty]

It seems they are getting even more serious now in the whole company thing.

There is an order sent out on the 20th of Juli, to go into effect on August 15th that any company formed with either more then 40% foreign shareholders OR a having a foreign director (regardless of shareholding), requiring all the Thai shareholders to prove their financial contributions into the company as per the shareholding structure!

Has nothing to do per se with acquiring real estate, they are just trying to get rid of the whole "nominee" shareholders thing.

So unless you partner with Thai shareholders, who actually have legally acquired the necessary funds needed, going the company way will be simply impossible!

In my humble opinion, sooner or later they will start digging into existing companies as well, forcing to get their stuff in order...

The short answer: do the lease!

I only do hope they will update the laws on leaseholding since in my opinion 30 years is simply not enough.

Nobody wants to run the risk when they retire here to get kicked out of their property when they just happen to last longer then the 30 year lease.

Lots of people are retiring at an age when they have a good chance of staying more then 30 years on this earth, and at such an advanced age the last thing you'd want is to lose your place to live in!

Edited August 5, 2006 by monty

[tuktukmike]

Hi Guys,

Here is the full copy of that report.

Rules tightened for joint ventures

[bKK Post]

//Quote removed//

[monty]

Companies violating the rules would face dissolution. Complicit shareholders also could face fines of up to one million baht and/or jail terms of up to three years.

In the future, the Business Development Department plans to examine existing registered companies with foreign shareholders to determine whether they breach the new rules or not.

Ms Orajit admitted that mistakes had been made in the past, in part due to department policies aimed at facilitating the establishment of new companies.

It's the bold part which should make you help the decission to go the lease way!

[Mobi]

Companies violating the rules would face dissolution. Complicit shareholders also could face fines of up to one million baht and/or jail terms of up to three years.

In the future, the Business Development Department plans to examine existing registered companies with foreign shareholders to determine whether they breach the new rules or not.

Ms Orajit admitted that mistakes had been made in the past, in part due to department policies aimed at facilitating the establishment of new companies.

It's the bold part which should make you help the decission to go the lease way!

Thanks for all that Monty and TukTUkMIke,

It's very interesting. At the risk of re-gurgiating all the stuff in earlier threads, what aon earth is this going to do to the housing market, as far as farangs are concerned? Seems to be the nail in the coffin for farangs buying land.

Looks like we have Thaksin and those criminals in Samui to thank for it.

I still find it very difficult to believe they will make serious attempts to investigate existing companies - I wonder what they will do about Shin? I mean, there must be thousands of companies with nominee shareholders - they just don't have the man power. To say nothing of the farang outcry -but they probably couldn't give a shit about that.

Anyway, regardless of what they may do, I have concluded that nominee shareholders may work in the short term, but what happens 5 or 10 years down the line? Could get messy. The best thing is to change to the lease route.

I'm thinking of contacting Sunbelt in Bangkok - can't use my existing lawyer who also supplied the shareholders. Anyone have any views on this?

[monty]

Mobi,

Another option you have is to transfer your shares for example to your wife (or another family member) to make it a 100% Thai entity, and resign as a director.

Then lease the land from that company.

You'll still have the ongoing costs of the company, but you'll save a heap with not having to register a sale (from the company to your wife) at land and house department.

And I don't think they need a lot of manpower to start checking the existing companies. They just have to send a letter to every company with foreign shareholders or a foreign director to bring in the required paperwork of the Thai shareholders. They do use computers, so it won't be to hard to create that mailing list!

The burden of proof doesn't rest with them but with the company!

For sure there's heaps of companies with nominee shareholders, but most of them will be wholly Thai owned and as such will not attract any attention!

We've only been in business 2 months, but we've already been visited several times by the revenue department and assorted govenment officials/departments, so they don't seem to terribly understaffed over there!

[suiging]

Companies violating the rules would face dissolution. Complicit shareholders also could face fines of up to one million baht and/or jail terms of up to three years.

In the future, the Business Development Department plans to examine existing registered companies with foreign shareholders to determine whether they breach the new rules or not.

Ms Orajit admitted that mistakes had been made in the past, in part due to department policies aimed at facilitating the establishment of new companies.

It's the bold part which should make you help the decission to go the lease way!

Thanks for all that Monty and TukTUkMIke,

It's very interesting. At the risk of re-gurgiating all the stuff in earlier threads, what aon earth is this going to do to the housing market, as far as farangs are concerned? Seems to be the nail in the coffin for farangs buying land.

Looks like we have Thaksin and those criminals in Samui to thank for it.

I still find it very difficult to believe they will make serious attempts to investigate existing companies - I wonder what they will do about Shin? I mean, there must be thousands of companies with nominee shareholders - they just don't have the man power. To say nothing of the farang outcry -but they probably couldn't give a shit about that.

Anyway, regardless of what they may do, I have concluded that nominee shareholders may work in the short term, but what happens 5 or 10 years down the line? Could get messy. The best thing is to change to the lease route.

I'm thinking of contacting Sunbelt in Bangkok - can't use my existing lawyer who also supplied the shareholders. Anyone have any views on this?

A number of senior law firms in BK have come up with company schemes involving holding companies which are one step removed from the company which owns the land, thus in law, the land is owned by Thai's and a Thai controlled ie over 50 % holding company. The holding company has a preferencial share structure to give you the real owner, voting/company control, security. This is a more expensive method but appears to be fully compliant with existing law. Sunbelt, I believe will have a route in similar fashion ironed out in the near future.

Edited August 5, 2006 by suiging

[thaiflyer1]

I'm thinking of contacting Sunbelt in Bangkok - can't use my existing lawyer who also supplied the shareholders. Anyone have any views on this?

I have a view...........why not go to the Sunbelt office in Pattaya?

Edit.....dug their number out.....038-412827.....fairly sure in stating they are located on 2nd road in the Plaza just before the Dolphin roundabout.

Edited August 5, 2006 by thaiflyer1

[suiging]

One last comment. We are now in a period of political posturing before the next election. Going after the Farang who owns his one retirement home may sound good now, but in reality the effect on the economy of killing the grey retirement market will be horrific. I certainy enjoy watching my hopefully soon to be completed retirement home being built, but I didn't construct the bugger. Teams of locals built it, local shops sell me the materials and I will employ locals in the future to help maintain it. Multiply this influx of overseas funds into the economy by the number of crusty old Farang doing the same, and I think post election a more pragmatic approach will prevail.

[Mobi]

A number of senior law firms in BK have come up with company schemes involving holding companies which are one step removed from the company which owns the land, thus in law, the land is owned by Thai's and a Thai controlled ie over 50 % holding company. The holding company has a preferencial share structure to give you the real owner, voting/company control, security. This is a more expensive method but appears to be fully compliant with existing law. Sunbelt, I believe will have a route in similar fashion ironed out in the near future.

Strange.

This method was put to me by a Bangkok lawyer over 3 years ago, when I was buying a house in BKK - so its certainly not a new idea. They also suggested setting up a company with 100% Thai shareholding, and changing the shareholding after land transfer. This has also been recently mooted, but presumably wouldn't work if they start to investigate all companies with farang shareholding - not just those that bought land.

I'm trying to think this holding company thing through. Even though a farang only has shares in the holding company, the holding company will still be investigated to establish if there are any nominee Thai shareholders? Surely the name of the game is to establish the source of the money which was ultimately used to buy the property? The holding company idea may get around the Farang land ownership loophole, but not necessarily around the farang - nominee shareholders issue. Surely the Shin corp set up is a case in point?

[suiging]

A number of senior law firms in BK have come up with company schemes involving holding companies which are one step removed from the company which owns the land, thus in law, the land is owned by Thai's and a Thai controlled ie over 50 % holding company. The holding company has a preferencial share structure to give you the real owner, voting/company control, security. This is a more expensive method but appears to be fully compliant with existing law. Sunbelt, I believe will have a route in similar fashion ironed out in the near future.

Strange.

This method was put to me by a Bangkok lawyer over 3 years ago, when I was buying a house in BKK - so its certainly not a new idea. They also suggested setting up a company with 100% Thai shareholding, and changing the shareholding after land transfer. This has also been recently mooted, but presumably wouldn't work if they start to investigate all companies with farang shareholding - not just those that bought land.

I'm trying to think this holding company thing through. Even though a farang only has shares in the holding company, the holding company will still be investigated to establish if there are any nominee Thai shareholders? Surely the name of the game is to establish the source of the money which was ultimately used to buy the property? The holding company idea may get around the Farang land ownership loophole, but not necessarily around the farang - nominee shareholders issue. Surely the Shin corp set up is a case in point?

True

I'm off to the airport as we speak and should be in lovely Pong by this evening ( off to see your kids, mid week ) I will be asking similar questions on this trip. I didn't say the schemes would work, just that these methods are being proposed.

[Mobi]

I'm thinking of contacting Sunbelt in Bangkok - can't use my existing lawyer who also supplied the shareholders. Anyone have any views on this?

I have a view...........why not go to the Sunbelt office in Pattaya?

Edit.....dug their number out.....038-412827.....fairly sure in stating they are located on 2nd road in the Plaza just before the Dolphin roundabout.

Thanks Thai Flyer.

I've just been doing an extensive search of their website and no mention of phone numbers or offices apart from their main offices at Fortune Tower in BKK. Or maybe I'm blind.

I was wondering if the Pattaya office is just an estate agent office?

[number6]

A number of senior law firms in BK have come up with company schemes involving holding companies which are one step removed from the company which owns the land, thus in law, the land is owned by Thai's and a Thai controlled ie over 50 % holding company. The holding company has a preferencial share structure to give you the real owner, voting/company control, security. This is a more expensive method but appears to be fully compliant with existing law. Sunbelt, I believe will have a route in similar fashion ironed out in the near future.

Why go to all this trouble, expense and hazzle to basically try and cercumvent the law - the thai law is clear foreigners cannot own land - keep to law and sleep well - myself my thai wife has the houses in her name (2) I have condos in my name kid (2) - most of our assets are abroad and legal - if you dont trust your wife then why did u marry her - if your a super big foragn co then worth it all im sure - if your investing less than say 10-20 million baht i question if its worth all this hassle - dont put morei n thailand than your prepared to trust to your wife or loose whichever

[JohnC]

Its always the same, find a solution and you raise new questions! I suspect I am not alone in that I came to Thailand for a quiet retirement, I have no wife or partner therefore transfering to them is not an option. The other point is if I did have a wife and transfered the property to her and then took out a lease whats to say the land office will not investigate where she got the money from to "buy" this x mil baht home? I know of a case recently in Pattaya where a Thai applied for a bank loand and stated his salary to be 15000 baht, when he went for interview they had checked his social security number and asked him why his taxable earnings were only 6000 baht!

So if you follow this through there is an outside possibility that the same could happen to anyone who takes over the ownership of your house! I think the earlier thread is probably right in that once the election is over things will settle down as they really cannot afford to lose all the money that farangs pump into the local economy of their respective regions. As an aside line when I had my retirement visa approved last month the boss lady asked if I owned my house or rented, I said I owned the company and she laughed and said same same no problem!! I await developments with interest as no doubt we all do!

[Mobi]

Its always the same, find a solution and you raise new questions! I suspect I am not alone in that I came to Thailand for a quiet retirement, I have no wife or partner therefore transfering to them is not an option. The other point is if I did have a wife and transfered the property to her and then took out a lease whats to say the land office will not investigate where she got the money from to "buy" this x mil baht home? I know of a case recently in Pattaya where a Thai applied for a bank loand and stated his salary to be 15000 baht, when he went for interview they had checked his social security number and asked him why his taxable earnings were only 6000 baht!

So if you follow this through there is an outside possibility that the same could happen to anyone who takes over the ownership of your house! I think the earlier thread is probably right in that once the election is over things will settle down as they really cannot afford to lose all the money that farangs pump into the local economy of their respective regions. As an aside line when I had my retirement visa approved last month the boss lady asked if I owned my house or rented, I said I owned the company and she laughed and said same same no problem!! I await developments with interest as no doubt we all do!

I may be wrong, but I reckon the potential loss of investment from farang house owners doesn't even warrant a footnote on the agenda of Thaksin and his cohorts right now.

And whoever wins the election - probably TRT - it will still not raise anyone's pulses for a very long time to come.

We flatter ourselves if we really think they give a shit about either us, intenational opinion or the effect on the regional economies.

Eventually they may do something, but many farangs may get burned in the meantime.

[thaiflyer1]

I've just been doing an extensive search of their website and no mention of phone numbers or offices apart from their main offices at Fortune Tower in BKK. Or maybe I'm blind.

I was wondering if the Pattaya office is just an estate agent office?

I got the number a while back via a pm from Greg (Sunbelt BKK ) but never ended up following it up so can't tell you what type of office it is.

Your right though its not shown on the website.

[tominchaam]

I may be wrong, but I reckon the potential loss of investment from farang house owners doesn't even warrant a footnote on the agenda of Thaksin and his cohorts right now.

And whoever wins the election - probably TRT - it will still not raise anyone's pulses for a very long time to come.

We flatter ourselves if we really think they give a shit about either us, intenational opinion or the effect on the regional economies.

Eventually they may do something, but many farangs may get burned in the meantime.

I do not understand why more people do not understand what Mobi D ´Ark explains above. Some farangs seem to only understand what they want to understand - even if they have been living here for years. I am really surprised to see people still interested in buying land in a way that is directly or indirectly not accepted by the Thai law! If they still do it it is their problem - but to me it means to make yourself a target for years to come.

Edited August 5, 2006 by tominchaam

[stevehaigh]

can you post the link to the report below?

thx steve

Hi Guys,

Here is the full copy of that report.

Rules tightened for joint ventures

[bKK Post]

New business registration rules will require all new companies with foreign shareholdings of more than 40% to declare their sources of funds, according to the Commerce Ministry.

The new policy, which will take effect on Aug 15, is aimed at guarding against the problems of nominee shareholders and increasing transparency in the corporate registration process.

Orajit Singkalavanich, the director-general of the ministry's Business Development Department, said the rule would also apply to new companies that are controlled by foreign entities, even if their direct shareholdings are less than 40%.

Shareholders must submit evidence of financing used to hold shares, including bank statements and other documents.

Authorities have taken a stricter line on the practice of nominee shareholders following the takeover of Shin Corporation by Singapore's Temasek Holdings earlier this year.

Temasek effectively has full control of Shin through the use of nominee companies, such as Kularb Kaew, despite the fact that Thai law limits foreign ownership at 49%.

Sources at the Business Development Department said a preliminary study found that Kularb Kaew was a proxy of Temasek, and did not qualify as a Thai company. The investigation is expected to be finalised this month.

A recent land scandal on Koh Samui has also raised public questions over the use of nominee shareholders by foreigners to bypass property ownership limits.

Ms Orajit said the department hoped the new rules would discourage the use of nominees by requiring Thai shareholders to prove that they are not acting as simple nominees on behalf of foreign buyers and have the financial means to actually hold shares.

''The department will examine all of those documents before giving approval,'' she said. ''We have learned that Thais have acted as nominees for foreign investors to avoid compliance with the Foreign Business Law, which limited foreign stakes at 49%. Tighter requirements [for proving] one's financial status will help us sort out this problem.''

Companies violating the rules would face dissolution. Complicit shareholders also could face fines of up to one million baht and/or jail terms of up to three years.

In the future, the Business Development Department plans to examine existing registered companies with foreign shareholders to determine whether they breach the new rules or not.

Ms Orajit admitted that mistakes had been made in the past, in part due to department policies aimed at facilitating the establishment of new companies.

In any case, she said the new procedures, while requiring more documentation for new registrations, would not necessarily result in longer waiting periods for approvals.

The department also wants to amend local laws to revise the definition of foreign businesses in order to cut down on existing loopholes.

[Chang_paarp]

can you post the link to the report below?

thx steve

Steve

It is discussed here with the complete text of the suplimentary requirements that come into force as of 14 August.

[number6]

I do not understand why more people do not understand what Mobi D ´Ark explains above. Some farangs seem to only understand what they want to understand - even if they have been living here for years. I am really surprised to see people still interested in buying land in a way that is directly or indirectly not accepted by the Thai law! If they still do it it is their problem - but to me it means to make yourself a target for years to come.

tockong absolutely corect - dont know whats wrong with ex pats here - ???? would you expect to use some silly loophole (illegal anyway) in UK or USA and risk investing a lot on the hope that government needs money so much they will turn a blind eye - also everyone or most seem to be so paranoid about trsuting their wifes etc - and yes if your not married legal way is 30 year lease or condo or rent - you deserve what you get if you get your fingures burnt - my 21c worth - and why why do so many rational older folk fall for honey trap but then i did and it seems to have worked for 5+ years but in end my love deserves all ive got here for wonderful best 5 years - juk but true

[Sunbelt Asia]

They also suggested setting up a company with 100% Thai shareholding, and changing the shareholding after land transfer. This has also been recently mooted, but presumably wouldn't work if they start to investigate all companies with farang shareholding - not just those that bought land.

This method is very risky and not reco.

I'm trying to think this holding company thing through. Even though a farang only has shares in the holding company, the holding company will still be investigated to establish if there are any nominee Thai shareholders? Surely the name of the game is to establish the source of the money which was ultimately used to buy the property? The holding company idea may get around the Farang land ownership loophole, but not necessarily around the farang - nominee shareholders issue. Surely the Shin corp set up is a case in point?

One of the holding company structures is set up like this...

http://www.property-report.com/archives.ph...0&date=0607

We don’t use people, Paul Ashburn senior partner in BDO, said. There are no Thai individuals in our structure, we use holding companies. I understand that we were the first transfer registered in Bangkok since this regulation came out, where we had a foreign shareholding owning 49% of the shares and there was no question about our shareholding structure, it was just routine.

A typical BDO structure would have a foreigner owning 49% shares and the remaining 51% owned by four BDO controlled holding companies. As holding companies, each one can have shareholdings in the other.

It’s very simple when we go to the land office and they ask for a list of shareholders, Ashburn said. They are all Thai. So, say we had four of our Thai companies in there, they then want to see the shareholding in those companies, we provide the shareholding list and they are all Thai. But they are all companies: there’s no people.

--------------------------------------------------

This works on the anti nominee shareholding but does not on the capital issue with some of the Land offices. Because as you stated the name of the game is " show me the money" You can loan it to a Thai person with proof who then lends it to a Thai company. ( they prefer this foreigner lender is not a shareholder) This keeps it legal as well even if the business objective is not real estate related. ( you must keep the Thai investment capital higher than the foreign investment and a personal loan does not count against the foreign capital side) Everything must be documented.

The proof is 4 Thais and the source of the capital invested from the Thais. Owning land with a Thai company can be done even if the money is from a foreigner. Again a foreigner lends to a Thai or Thai company, that Thai/company then lends or buys shares with the Thai company holding the land. This does not violate any Foreign Business Act or Land Act. Show proof and everyone smiles. The foreigner still can control the company by having more voting rights.

Click here to see the post on what they are looking for here...

Show them the Money

If you have no real plans to do a business. Just do a 30 year lease.

I got the number a while back via a pm from Greg (Sunbelt BKK ) but never ended up following it up so can't tell you what type of office it is.

Your right though its not shown on the website.

We have several Thai licensed lawyers that work there in the legal dept with a accounting department as well at the office. We don't have a real estate office in the Pattaya area, its only legal, accounting and business acquisitions. Website is being developed for the Pattaya office and will be up soon.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[yorkman]

They also suggested setting up a company with 100% Thai shareholding, and changing the shareholding after land transfer. This has also been recently mooted, but presumably wouldn't work if they start to investigate all companies with farang shareholding - not just those that bought land.

This method is very risky and not reco.

I'm trying to think this holding company thing through. Even though a farang only has shares in the holding company, the holding company will still be investigated to establish if there are any nominee Thai shareholders? Surely the name of the game is to establish the source of the money which was ultimately used to buy the property? The holding company idea may get around the Farang land ownership loophole, but not necessarily around the farang - nominee shareholders issue. Surely the Shin corp set up is a case in point?

One of the holding company structures is set up like this...

http://www.property-report.com/archives.ph...0&date=0607

We don’t use people, Paul Ashburn senior partner in BDO, said. There are no Thai individuals in our structure, we use holding companies. I understand that we were the first transfer registered in Bangkok since this regulation came out, where we had a foreign shareholding owning 49% of the shares and there was no question about our shareholding structure, it was just routine.

A typical BDO structure would have a foreigner owning 49% shares and the remaining 51% owned by four BDO controlled holding companies. As holding companies, each one can have shareholdings in the other.

It’s very simple when we go to the land office and they ask for a list of shareholders, Ashburn said. They are all Thai. So, say we had four of our Thai companies in there, they then want to see the shareholding in those companies, we provide the shareholding list and they are all Thai. But they are all companies: there’s no people.

--------------------------------------------------

This works on the anti nominee shareholding but does not on the capital issue with some of the Land offices. Because as you stated the name of the game is " show me the money" You can loan it to a Thai person with proof who then lends it to a Thai company. ( they prefer this foreigner lender is not a shareholder) This keeps it legal as well even if the business objective is not real estate related. ( you must keep the Thai investment capital higher than the foreign investment and a personal loan does not count against the foreign capital side) Everything must be documented.

The proof is 4 Thais and the source of the capital invested from the Thais. Owning land with a Thai company can be done even if the money is from a foreigner. Again a foreigner lends to a Thai or Thai company, that Thai/company then lends or buys shares with the Thai company holding the land. This does not violate any Foreign Business Act or Land Act. Show proof and everyone smiles. The foreigner still can control the company by having more voting rights.

Click here to see the post on what they are looking for here...

Show them the Money

If you have no real plans to do a business. Just do a 30 year lease.

I got the number a while back via a pm from Greg (Sunbelt BKK ) but never ended up following it up so can't tell you what type of office it is.

Your right though its not shown on the website.

We have several Thai licensed lawyers that work there in the legal dept with a accounting department as well at the office. We don't have a real estate office in the Pattaya area, its only legal, accounting and business acquisitions. Website is being developed for the Pattaya office and will be up soon.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

Sooooooo...why don't you do a "superficies" (ask a competant lawyer.......)

It's your to live there for the rest of your life (no 30 year rule), and your wife who is still the land owner gets it all after you die, will or no will.

It cost me 400B (fixed fee) at my local Amphur

I note however I am back to 3 posts (maybe the site owners who promote company formation, and profit from them, have deleted a few posts..who knows...... )

[Khun Jean]

If you have no real plans to do a business. Just do a 30 year lease.

Thanks Sunbelt. I think this says it all. Short and to the point!

[Sunbelt Asia]

Sooooooo...why don't you do a "superficies" (ask a competant lawyer.......)

It's your to live there for the rest of your life (no 30 year rule), and your wife who is still the land owner gets it all after you die, will or no will.

Superficies is in fact similar to a lease, and many of the rules concerning leases apply to superficies. What some feel is a lease is in fact a superficies.

Unfortunately no method is perfect. There are pitfalls and caveats in every method when having rights to use the land or buildings with leases, superficies, usufruct, rights to habitation, servitudes or charges.

Example for you the lifetime option is better ( as long as a person has a good non violent wife) But for others the 30 year lease may be better if they are a 60 year old single man with a 30 year superficies, as it can be both transferable and transmissible by the way of inheritance.

As for your wife getting the land, any of the rights in land are the same if she owns the land now. You die and she still is the land owner.

www.sunbeltasia.com

[~G~]

A typical BDO structure would have a foreigner owning 49% shares and the remaining 51% owned by four BDO controlled holding companies. As holding companies, each one can have shareholdings in the other.

1 + 4 = 5. Where are two more?

[Sunbelt Asia]

A typical BDO structure would have a foreigner owning 49% shares and the remaining 51% owned by four BDO controlled holding companies. As holding companies, each one can have shareholdings in the other.

1 + 4 = 5. Where are two more?

With this structure, they have 3 foreigners with the two foreigners possibly only holding 1 share each.

With land they require 4 Thais and with a business just 1 Thai is required if it is a restricted business.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com