111 replies to this topic
Posted 2009-11-01 11:53:53
 michaelbutcher, on 2009-09-09 18:25:01, said:
had a 'head's up' from long term friend and orbortor official saying there're widespread plans afoot to seek out all foreigners' investment property here and 'remedy' anything looking slightly dodgy. between the lines from aforesaid, they want all foreign investment to cease immediately (in light of no outside investment here, they seem to think that foreigners have grabbed the lion's share of land - notwithstanding the fact the locals themselves have profited from the many sales in the past), quickly followed by an 'ousting' of any foreigners 'deemed' to have been in breach of any and all thai based property laws.
Living in Thailand since 5 years, working leagally, married, owning land and house (wife of course), i am trying again and again to find someone who reallly knows the facts on this matter. again in this posts, there are so many different explantations, disagreeing with each other... why is it so hard???? i have some good investment options on hand (land and development) and i certaintly trust my wife (as someone called it a "Genuine marriage") that i wouldn't want to get into any company ltd, but i still hesitate because of all these posts about land being taked away, etc... Is there a any "official" government department who can give proper advice on this matter?
Posted 2009-11-04 16:03:00
CHFarang, on 2009-11-01 11:53:53, said: Living in Thailand since 5 years, working leagally, married, owning land and house (wife of course), i am trying again and again to find someone who reallly knows the facts on this matter.
I don't think you are ever going to find someone who truly knows the facts. Even those officials who are interpreting the laws don't really know them. They all have their own political agendas.
What you do know for sure is this. The paper you sign at the land office when your Thai wife buys property is for the benefit of the land office, not for you. This is only so that they do not have to spend an inordinate amount of time verifying where the funds for the purchase came from. If you lie on that paper, i.e. you provide the funds for the property which your wife is purchasing, or you use communal assets, you are guilty of fraud. If that is what you decide to do, it isn't very smart, and you might get caught.
There are many ways around this problem. Perhaps the easiest is what was done prior to 1999. You give the money to your wife's parents. They purchase the property. You have no interest in it. Your wife then inherits it from them. This is a very clear, legally provable path that shows the assets used were entirely from your wife and not communal property. BTW, if you try to do some tricky legal procedure here to maintain some control of the property then you expose yourself to being caught in the nominee trap. The Thai law is designed to make sure you have no legal rights to the property. None. If you do anything to protect your interest in the property, then you are trying to evade the law and you run the risk of getting caught.
Another strategy , you can get your wife a job, wait a few years, have the wife qualify for a mortgage on the strength of her salary alone, and then pay off the mortgage. Technically, the loan becomes the source of the funds, and belongs entirely to your wife. BTW, the Government Housing Bank will not give a Thai person married to a foreigner a loan to purchase property (condos OK) for any reason reason, independent of the 1999 ruling. Their view is that the money used to repay the loan is communal property, and therefore is not in the spirit of keeping of guaranteeing the source of money used for the house comes strictly from the Thai partner. Private banks are not so picky about this issue, but it does seem to possibly open up a legal interpretation. This may not provide you all the protection you need.
I've also heard that if you gift the wife the funds for the house before you marry, then those can be used to justify purchase the house and not be subject to nominee status. Again though, don't try and play games here or the official might decide to make an example of you. You can not have any interest in the property.
If you follow the laws as written, they don't seem to be that ambiguous. But do be prepared for anything. If you want to own property, your wife needs to be able to show she was financially capable of purchasing the property without you or your communal funds earned during marriage. Do that and it would seem that you are safe. That is the actual intent of the law after all.
Posted 2009-11-04 16:54:50
gregb, on 2009-11-04 16:03:00, said: ..What you do know for sure is this. The paper you sign at the land office when your Thai wife buys property is for the benefit of the land office, not for you. This is only so that they do not have to spend an inordinate amount of time verifying where the funds for the purchase came from. If you lie on that paper, i.e. you provide the funds for the property which your wife is purchasing, or you use communal assets, you are guilty of fraud. If that is what you decide to do, it isn't very smart, and you might get caught.
..
Scaremongering
The paper only says it is her money, that is not a matrimonial asset, and you have no claim on it. If you have given it to her that is true and there is no fruad.
I suggest the poster does like thousands of married couples already have and go the property, sign the paper and live happily ever after.
Not once has a piece of property been taken away, in fact, what the land dept actually says is that if you haven't signed the paper (and people whose wives have not changed their names tend to not sign) then you have may have broken the law.
TH
Edited by thaihome, 2009-11-04 16:57:58.
Posted 2009-11-04 19:46:44
thaihome, on 2009-11-04 16:54:50, said:
Not scaremongering at all.
Just being honest about the rules, and the way people conveniently misinterpret them for their own interests.
Talk to a Thai divorce lawyer if you doubt the very legal definition of what is considered communal assets and what assets are considered individual. It is a simple question. You will find that nearly all income generated while the couple is married is considered communal. If you subsequently state on the form at the land office that communal money was solely hers, then you have not told the truth.
Only those assets that would be ruled 100% hers in a divorce should be used to purchase the property. And it is simple to understand why. In the event of a divorce, it must be legally 100% true that you have no claim to the land. If you were to use communal assets, then this claim could not be made. And if you can't honestly make that claim, then your wife is in fact acting as a nominee for your interests while you are married.
There are many rules that aren't enforced until it becomes politically expedient to. Again, that paper you sign at the land office is for their benefit, not yours. It does not have a clear legal standing in a divorce. A foreigner can successfully argue the case that part of the house is his during a divorce settlement even if that paper was signed by him. He just needs to prove the assets used to purchase it were truly communal or were in fact his.
Whether anyone can truly win in a Thai court with this strategy I don't know. I do however know 2 foreigners who have successfully settled out of court using this premise with full backing from their divorce attorneys as to the legality of the argument.
BTW, you most definitely have broken the law if you do not sign that paper. The land office is required to verify that communal assets were not used to purchase that land in the event that a foreigner is involved, and you are legally required to cooperate with them to this extent. This is paper is the way they verify that. If you misrepresent your marriage to the land officer, that is clearly fraud.
Posted 2009-11-04 21:09:32
^ I understand that there are farang ex-husbands who have forced land sales thru the courts as part of the divorce settlement. There was a guy with land on auction in Phuket, he was encouraging ppl to attend the auction and advising them to never give up as they had rights for anything purchased while married.
Posted 2009-11-04 22:13:09
my buddy told me this
its slightly off topic and i am not saying anything other than what i was told by someone i trust 100%
thailand is going to make a new law
thais who own the 51% will be required to prove where the money came from
if they cannot they will be forced to sell to the gov at 1 3rd
just reporting what i was told by a guy who has always seem to have an uncanny ability to know whats going on
Posted 2009-11-04 22:33:57
Having done everything legit - have no worries whatsoever about the Thai government pursuing us as a genuine couple/ family. Condo is in the wife's name. Downpayments and mortgage payments have always come from joint bank accounts and will continue to do so.
Posted 2009-11-05 07:50:40
straightdave, on 2009-11-04 22:13:09, said: my buddy told me this
its slightly off topic and i am not saying anything other than what i was told by someone i trust 100%
thailand is going to make a new law
thais who own the 51% will be required to prove where the money came from
if they cannot they will be forced to sell to the gov at 1 3rd
just reporting what i was told by a guy who has always seem to have an uncanny ability to know whats going on
Are you talking about the 51% majority holding by Thais in a company?
Posted 2009-11-05 09:02:37
gregb, on 2009-11-04 19:46:44, said: thaihome, on 2009-11-04 16:54:50, said:
Not scaremongering at all.
Just being honest about the rules, and the way people conveniently misinterpret them for their own interests.
Talk to a Thai divorce lawyer if you doubt the very legal definition of what is considered communal assets and what assets are considered individual. It is a simple question. You will find that nearly all income generated while the couple is married is considered communal. If you subsequently state on the form at the land office that communal money was solely hers, then you have not told the truth.
Only those assets that would be ruled 100% hers in a divorce should be used to purchase the property. And it is simple to understand why. In the event of a divorce, it must be legally 100% true that you have no claim to the land. If you were to use communal assets, then this claim could not be made. And if you can't honestly make that claim, then your wife is in fact acting as a nominee for your interests while you are married.
There are many rules that aren't enforced until it becomes politically expedient to. Again, that paper you sign at the land office is for their benefit, not yours. It does not have a clear legal standing in a divorce. A foreigner can successfully argue the case that part of the house is his during a divorce settlement even if that paper was signed by him. He just needs to prove the assets used to purchase it were truly communal or were in fact his.
Whether anyone can truly win in a Thai court with this strategy I don't know. I do however know 2 foreigners who have successfully settled out of court using this premise with full backing from their divorce attorneys as to the legality of the argument.
BTW, you most definitely have broken the law if you do not sign that paper. The land office is required to verify that communal assets were not used to purchase that land in the event that a foreigner is involved, and you are legally required to cooperate with them to this extent. This is paper is the way they verify that. If you misrepresent your marriage to the land officer, that is clearly fraud.
You are indeed scaremongering. The poster in question stated he wanted to make some investments in land, he did not want to go the Thai company route and he fully trusted his wife but was worried about hearing stories of the government taking land away.
You responded saying that if the husband gave his wife the money and signs the affidavit he was committing fraud. That is just not true. Then go on and on about splitting assets during a divorce. This is a complete strawman and has nothing to do with the posters question.
The facts remain, you can give your wife the money, sign the affidavit saying you have no interest in the property and it is not matrimonial property and that is all perfectly legal within the law.
In no case as the government ever taken land away from a Thai women married to foreigner. Both of your posts on this subject are attempts to scare people into believing their wives cannot buy property. The can and people do it everyday. Just go to any land office in an urban area and you will see it for yourself.
TH
Posted 2009-11-05 12:20:19
The government does not take away land.
The law clearly states that if a judge finds the title deed not to be in order (i.e. in a company where the Thai shareholders are unable to prove that they actually invested funds in it), then the judge will order the land to be disposed of, and he will state a time frame in which this has to happen.
This time frame will be set between 180 days and 1 year.
Only after this period, the government can proceed with a forced auction, of which the proceeds (minus costs of course) will still go to the entity owning the land.
I seriously doubt they will vote in a law allowing a judge to order the government to buy the land at 33% of listed value!
Posted 2009-11-05 12:53:43
thaihome, on 2009-11-05 09:02:37, said: You are indeed scaremongering. The poster in question stated he wanted to make some investments in land, he did not want to go the Thai company route and he fully trusted his wife but was worried about hearing stories of the government taking land away.
You responded saying that if the husband gave his wife the money and signs the affidavit he was committing fraud. That is just not true. Then go on and on about splitting assets during a divorce. This is a complete strawman and has nothing to do with the posters question.
I'm not sure exactly where your emotional analysis is coming from but I won't bother continuing this discussion.
What I will say to everyone is the following:
If you sign a piece of paper, be absolutely sure that what you are saying is 100% truthful. There is a legal definition of what constitutes personal assets and what constitutes communal assets in a Thai marriage. Learn what those are, and make sure you have documentation to prove that what you are stating on the paper you sign at the land office is in fact the truth.
As long as you are quite certain you can defend your position that property was purchased with assets that the Thai law would consider to be your wife's individual assets, (not your assets and not communal assets) you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
I would never advise someone to sign their name to any document where they are not being 100% truthful.
I learned alot about this when I tried to get a loan from the Government Housing Bank. Khan Prachuabmoh's (the bank Governor's) staff was extremely helpful, but there was nothing they could do. I had a personal relationship with his nephew, and if there was any way they could have assisted me, they would have. This is not scaremongering. I am telling you how a very well intentioned government institution, who would in fact benefit by taking the opposing position, views the law. You would be wise to at least pay attention to it, even if it doesn't match up with your personal desires.
Posted 2009-11-05 13:47:56
gregb, on 2009-11-05 12:53:43, said: ...If you sign a piece of paper, be absolutely sure that what you are saying is 100% truthful. There is a legal definition of what constitutes personal assets and what constitutes communal assets in a Thai marriage. Learn what those are, and make sure you have documentation to prove that what you are stating on the paper you sign at the land office is in fact the truth.
.... You would be wise to at least pay attention to it, even if it doesn't match up with your personal desires.
I am just not sure what you are trying to say. It just has the appearance (with no apparent substance) of some sort of ominous thing you know about and nobody else does.
How about you answer a simple question.
I make an overseas transfer into a Thai bank account in my wifes name and with the proceeds from that my wife buys a condo (or house and land), registering it in her name. During that transaction, the Land Dept has me sign an affidavit stating the money is hers, I have no claim on it, and the property is not matrimonial property.
Have I done anything that is illegal (fraud, I believe you called it) as you seem to be claiming?
Simple question, requiring only a yes or no.
TH
Posted 2009-11-05 16:55:11
I think he will say yes.
I say that because in his interpretation strictly speaking the money that you transferred to your wife's account would, once transferred, be defined as communal money by the law, and as such signing the affidavit stating that the money is hers would be incorrect, and in his view fraudulent, which implies that somehow you intended to deceive.
If at the time you were unaware of the legal definition of communal income, how can you knowingly be intent on making this deception? Perhaps ignorance of the law here is no defence but still...
Also if I have understood him fully, he thinks that a wife who has the capability to get a mortgage on a house in her name, based on her salary alone, is also in danger of being viewed as a nominee, because the money used to repay said loan could be defined as communal income in the eyes of the law.
Now this should worry me as this is the position that my wife and I are in. But it doesn't, much...
I personally stand by my previous interpretation, I have waived my right to claim the property as communal property, its her mortgage and her money paying the loan, so fail to see how she can be acting as my nominee. I am not making a claim to the property in the divorce courts so her ownership is uncontested.
If I extrapolate Gregb's view further, he could even say that once married the Thai spouse can not use any income that they generate themselves after marriage, to purchase land whilst married, as this would be communal income and by extension they could, in his view, be acting as nominees for their foreign husband.
That's quite a statement to make...i.e. they can own land, but once married they can only acquire more by using money that the wife had already made before.
Now I personally believe that this goes against the spirit of the 1999 constitutional ruling that allows Thai wives to own land, which I accept that they are still technically allowed to do, even under this interpretation, however I can not accept that the law would handicap them to this extent.
Thankfully commercial banks don't see it that way either, not in their interest to perhaps, but they have access to pretty good legal teams, who no doubt have a far deeper appreciation of the matter than any of us.
Edited by quiksilva, 2009-11-05 17:24:42.
Posted 2009-11-05 22:37:56
quiksilva, on 2009-11-05 04:55:11, said: If I extrapolate Gregb's view further, he could even say that once married the Thai spouse can not use any income that they generate themselves after marriage, to purchase land whilst married, as this would be communal income and by extension they could, in his view, be acting as nominees for their foreign husband.
That's quite a statement to make...i.e. they can own land, but once married they can only acquire more by using money that the wife had already made before.
I agree with you. Given gregb's view regarding what he considers communal income, the only way a Thai spouse (male or female) married to a farang could legally own land would be in the case where they used funds that they accumulated prior to being married.
Although the meaning of the signing of that document by farangs at the land office has been debated here before, I can't help agreeing with the view that thaihome and you hold. The signing of that paper to me implies that, as of that moment, the money is not communal money and is the Thai spouse's money alone. Thus the property is now no longer considered a communal assest.
Now my situation is much more problematic. My wife and I never registered our marriage in Thailand. We live in the US. My wife still has herself listed as single on her Thai ID. When she went to purchase land a few years ago, I was ready and willing to sign away my rights. But because of her ID card, I was told that there was no need for me to sign anything. I didn't like it, but I didn't know what to do.
Posted 2009-11-06 09:05:07
Here is a legal brief prepared by Tilke and Gibbons that addresses the issue (amoung others):
2008-2009 Tilleke & Gibbins International Ltd. August 2009
Thailand Legal Basics
....
Can a Thai with an Alien Spouse Own a Piece of Land?
Previously, a Thai with a lawful alien spouse was not allowed to own a piece of land in Thailand, because under the Land Act, aliens are prohibited from owning land in Thailand. If the Thai spouse were allowed to own land, the land would be sin somros (community property), and the foreign spouse would have the right to own half of that land.
According to Article 30 of the Constitution of Thailand B.E. 2550 (A.D. 2007), all persons are equal before the law and shall enjoy equal protection under the law. Men and women shall enjoy equal rights. Unjust discrimination against a person on the grounds of origin, race, language, sex, age, disability, physical or health condition, personal status, economic or social standing, religious belief, education, or constitutionally political view shall not be permitted. Also, according to Article 41 paragraph 1, the property right of a person is protected. The extent and the restriction of such right shall be in accordance with the provisions of the law.
To abide by the provisions of the current Thai Constitution, the Interior Ministry has set up the following guidelines to be followed by the competent land authorities:
• If a Thai with a lawful alien spouse wishes to make land purchases or accept land transfers in a like manner during marriage, and if the official inquiry reveals that the applicant, along with the alien spouse, have jointly affirmed in writing that the money used to buy the land is derived wholly from separate property owned by the applicant and not from community property, the competent authorities shall proceed with the registration of legal rights in land for the applicant. However, if the alien spouse fails to make such affirmation or affirms in writing that all or part of the money so used is out of the community property, after the inquiry has been made the matter shall be submitted for decision to the Minister in charge through the Royal Land Department. This is in accordance with Section 74, paragraph 2 of the Land Act.
• If a Thai with an unlawful alien spouse wishes to make land purchases or accept land transfers in a like manner while living with the spouse as husband and wife, and if the official inquiry reveals that the applicant, along with the alien spouse, have jointly affirmed in writing that the money used to buy the land is derived wholly from personal property owned by the applicant and not from property jointly owned by the parties, the competent authorities shall proceed with the registration of legal rights in land for the applicant. However, if the alien spouse fails to make such affirmation or affirms in writing that all or part of the money so used is out of the money jointly earned by the parties, after the inquiry has been made the matter shall be submitted for decision to the Minister in charge through the Royal Land Department. This is in accordance with Section 74 paragraph 2 of the Land Act.
41
• If a Thai with an alien spouse, whether unlawful or not, wishes to accept land as a gift during marriage while living with the spouse as husband and wife, and if the official inquiry reveals that the gift has been accepted as separate property or as personal property only and that the alien spouse has no ownership interests in land, the competent authorities shall proceed with the registration of legal rights in land for the applicant. However, if the gift has been accepted as community property, and if the alien spouse has ownership interests in land, after the inquiry has been made the matter shall be submitted for decision to the Minister in charge through the Royal Land Department. This is in accordance with Section 74 paragraph 2 of the Land Act.
• If a Thai who once had an alien spouse but has now divorced or deserted said spouse wishes to make registrations of land acquisitions, and if the official inquiry reveals that there are no circumstances where evasion of the law has been committed, the competent authorities shall proceed with the registration of legal rights in land for the applicant.
• If a Thai minor who is born of an alien wishes to make registration of land acquisitions, and if the official inquiry reveals that there are no circumstances where evasion of the law has been committed, the competent authorities shall proceed with the registration of legal rights in land for the applicant.
The Royal Land Department also requires that the alien spouse give spousal consent in the matter, not only in writing but also in person. If the alien spouse is unable to make a trip to Thailand for any reason to give the required consent, such alien may make an affidavit before a notary public which is later suitably attested by a Thai Consulate located in the country concerned, and then submit the affidavit to the Royal Land Department.
Edited by thaihome, 2009-11-06 09:09:30.
Posted 2009-11-06 13:41:44
monty, on 2009-11-05 13:20:19, said: The government does not take away land.
The law clearly states that if a judge finds the title deed not to be in order (i.e. in a company where the Thai shareholders are unable to prove that they actually invested funds in it), then the judge will order the land to be disposed of, and he will state a time frame in which this has to happen.
This time frame will be set between 180 days and 1 year.
Only after this period, the government can proceed with a forced auction, of which the proceeds (minus costs of course) will still go to the entity owning the land.
I seriously doubt they will vote in a law allowing a judge to order the government to buy the land at 33% of listed value!
Not agreeing with land grab post necessarily but slightly OT 100% of declared value would be deemed maximum compensation required - can't then argue not real value as under-declared it for tax purposes.
Posted 2009-11-06 19:13:16
donx, on 2009-11-05 22:37:56, said: Now my situation is much more problematic. My wife and I never registered our marriage in Thailand. We live in the US. My wife still has herself listed as single on her Thai ID. When she went to purchase land a few years ago, I was ready and willing to sign away my rights. But because of her ID card, I was told that there was no need for me to sign anything. I didn't like it, but I didn't know what to do.
yeah...I'm in a similar position; we were married at the Thai Embassy in Abu Dhabi and never registered our marriage in Thailand (our marriage cert. is a legal Thai document) and the wife kept her maiden name on the ID card. I was away working when she purchased our house and registered it at the land office and there was no declaration to sign as no one asked if she was married to a falang...and we were unaware that there was any such requirement...
Posted 2009-11-06 19:44:24
CHFarang, on 2009-11-01 11:53:53, said: michaelbutcher, on 2009-09-09 18:25:01, said: had a 'head's up' from long term friend and orbortor official saying there're widespread plans afoot to seek out all foreigners' investment property here and 'remedy' anything looking slightly dodgy. between the lines from aforesaid, they want all foreign investment to cease immediately (in light of no outside investment here, they seem to think that foreigners have grabbed the lion's share of land - notwithstanding the fact the locals themselves have profited from the many sales in the past), quickly followed by an 'ousting' of any foreigners 'deemed' to have been in breach of any and all thai based property laws.
Living in Thailand since 5 years, working leagally, married, owning land and house (wife of course), i am trying again and again to find someone who reallly knows the facts on this matter. again in this posts, there are so many different explantations, disagreeing with each other... why is it so hard???? i have some good investment options on hand (land and development) and i certaintly trust my wife (as someone called it a "Genuine marriage") that i wouldn't want to get into any company ltd, but i still hesitate because of all these posts about land being taked away, etc... Is there a any "official" government department who can give proper advice on this matter?
"Living & working legally".... As well-intentioned and/or well-informed as you may be, you'll never be 100% legal in thailand and free from potential legal and/or financial issues.
It was reported this year in the news that Thai wives of foreign men who owned property could be challenged as to the source of funds that were used to purchase property. In the event that the funds came from the husband, the wife could be considered as a nominee buyer and the property could be subject to confiscation. It's not enough now that a foreigner purchases property in the name of his Thai wife & waives all rights to ownership, the Thai gov't now reserves the right to confiscate such property. We've already been put "on notice".
I might mention that Thai law (of the interpretation thereof) treats Thai men married to foreign women completely differently than Thai woman married to a foreigner.
Forget getting a concise answer because it's a "moving target" and the rules change frequently.
Bottom line, don't invest any money in Thailand that you can't afford to lose!!!
Posted 2009-11-06 20:05:09
thaihome, on 2009-11-05 09:02:37, said: gregb, on 2009-11-04 19:46:44, said: thaihome, on 2009-11-04 16:54:50, said:
Not scaremongering at all.
Just being honest about the rules, and the way people conveniently misinterpret them for their own interests.
Talk to a Thai divorce lawyer if you doubt the very legal definition of what is considered communal assets and what assets are considered individual. It is a simple question. You will find that nearly all income generated while the couple is married is considered communal. If you subsequently state on the form at the land office that communal money was solely hers, then you have not told the truth.
Only those assets that would be ruled 100% hers in a divorce should be used to purchase the property. And it is simple to understand why. In the event of a divorce, it must be legally 100% true that you have no claim to the land. If you were to use communal assets, then this claim could not be made. And if you can't honestly make that claim, then your wife is in fact acting as a nominee for your interests while you are married.
There are many rules that aren't enforced until it becomes politically expedient to. Again, that paper you sign at the land office is for their benefit, not yours. It does not have a clear legal standing in a divorce. A foreigner can successfully argue the case that part of the house is his during a divorce settlement even if that paper was signed by him. He just needs to prove the assets used to purchase it were truly communal or were in fact his.
Whether anyone can truly win in a Thai court with this strategy I don't know. I do however know 2 foreigners who have successfully settled out of court using this premise with full backing from their divorce attorneys as to the legality of the argument.
BTW, you most definitely have broken the law if you do not sign that paper. The land office is required to verify that communal assets were not used to purchase that land in the event that a foreigner is involved, and you are legally required to cooperate with them to this extent. This is paper is the way they verify that. If you misrepresent your marriage to the land officer, that is clearly fraud.
You are indeed scaremongering. The poster in question stated he wanted to make some investments in land, he did not want to go the Thai company route and he fully trusted his wife but was worried about hearing stories of the government taking land away.
You responded saying that if the husband gave his wife the money and signs the affidavit he was committing fraud. That is just not true. Then go on and on about splitting assets during a divorce. This is a complete strawman and has nothing to do with the posters question.
The facts remain, you can give your wife the money, sign the affidavit saying you have no interest in the property and it is not matrimonial property and that is all perfectly legal within the law.
In no case as the government ever taken land away from a Thai women married to foreigner. Both of your posts on this subject are attempts to scare people into believing their wives cannot buy property. The can and people do it everyday. Just go to any land office in an urban area and you will see it for yourself.
TH
"scaremongering"...
I've heard that before. Sure, Thai wives can "currently" buy property but who knows what the gov't policy is tomorrow or next year. Over the past 20 years, I have seen many things change in Thailand, and in particular, how laws are enforced. The thai gov't can be very opportunistic relating to law enforcement. "Looking the other way" or allowing certain practices which may not be in accordance in certain laws does certainly not indicate the Thai gov't sanctions such practices. The legal doctrine of "latches" does not apply here!
As an example, look at the 6-month customs law regarding foreign yachts in Thailand. Years ago, it was never an issue and then suddenly thai customs began assessing horrific customs duties on foreign yachts that had overstayed the 6-month legal limit. Perhaps someday in the near future, the thai gov't will begin to audit all land ownership and confiscate those properties whereas the Thai owner cannot "prove" that he was the source of all the purchase funds. It's completely possible and this scenario was even posed by a senior land department official. What more notice do you need, a certified letter?
Forget the law on the books, it's all about how the laws are interpeted and/or enforced in thailand. Some laws are completely ignored while other laws can be arbitrarily enforced to the nth degree.
Posted 2009-11-07 08:06:37
thefalang, on 2009-11-06 20:05:09, said: Sure, Thai wives can "currently" buy property but who knows what the gov't policy is tomorrow or next year.
That may be so, but do not forget that the very reason for why Thai women, married to foreigner, were allowed to buy land back in 1999 was a ruling by the supreme court that it was unconstitutional to disallow them that right.
Posted 2009-11-07 09:19:46
Still, scaremongering!
Yes, they might crack down, and yes, they might force people to sell up or get legal.
They can confiscate, but only ordered by a judge, and he will only do that in the case where the property has been bought with for example drugs money etc. Unrelated to the current ownership set-ups.
If proven to be a nominee set up you will be given between 180 days and 1 year to dispose of the property. They will not confiscate!
Admittedly, if this happens on a larger scale, it would have rather disastrous effects on prices of all tha property suddenly hitting the market!
The other scenario where outright confiscation will and can happen is where the paperwork is dodgy, i.e. illegally issued land title deeds by corrupt officials in national parks etc... Happened before!
Posted 2009-11-07 09:57:38
monty, on 2009-11-07 10:19:46, said: Still, scaremongering!
Yes, they might crack down, and yes, they might force people to sell up or get legal.
They can confiscate, but only ordered by a judge, and he will only do that in the case where the property has been bought with for example drugs money etc. Unrelated to the current ownership set-ups.
If proven to be a nominee set up you will be given between 180 days and 1 year to dispose of the property. They will not confiscate!
Admittedly, if this happens on a larger scale, it would have rather disastrous effects on prices of all tha property suddenly hitting the market!
The other scenario where outright confiscation will and can happen is where the paperwork is dodgy, i.e. illegally issued land title deeds by corrupt officials in national parks etc... Happened before!
"sacremongering" ...
You have much more trust in the "equity" of the Thai legal system than I do. Don't believe for one minute that the Thai gov't would not behave irrationally and "shoot itself in the foot", something that it does on a daily basis. Laws are implemented and decisions made (seemingly) without any thought of the consequences. "Forward thinking"... What's that?
"They will not confiscate your property." I don't beleive that. If you, a foreinger, have been proven to have circumvented thai law and used a nominee buyer, that's most probably a criminal offence. You're likely to be stripped of your assets, deported and blacklisted!
I'm aware of numerous cases whereas a Thai official was conducting official business within seemingly "legal" boundaries & within the scope of his authority. The gov't stated that the official was not personally authorized for that particular act (or some other excuse) and voided the whole affair, at great financial loss to the foreigner(s) involved. I've seen this type of treatment with regards to the registration of yachts, visa renewals, etc. It's very convenient (and scary) when any gov't can deny liabilty for acts of a bona fide gov't official.
Edited by thefalang, 2009-11-07 10:00:37.
Posted 2009-11-07 10:10:47
stgrhe, on 2009-11-07 09:06:37, said: thefalang, on 2009-11-06 20:05:09, said: Sure, Thai wives can "currently" buy property but who knows what the gov't policy is tomorrow or next year.
That may be so, but do not forget that the very reason for why Thai women, married to foreigner, were allowed to buy land back in 1999 was a ruling by the supreme court that it was unconstitutional to disallow them that right.
I believe you're missing the point.
Thai women, married to a foreigner, can purchase property. It is presumed that the foreigner has waived any rights to the property and that the foreigner is not the source of funds. If the forienger has provided the purchase funds, it could be intrepreted as a nominee purchase and therefore illegal.
Posted 2009-11-07 10:50:56
This has as usual become a pointless discussion as some people just can’t get past their farang paranoia and choose to ignore the actual facts. It is unfortunate that they continue to infect other people with their half truths, illogical conjecture, and the anticipation that if they have not been victimized yet, they certainly will be some time in the future.
TH
Posted 2009-11-07 11:31:43
thaihome, on 2009-11-07 11:50:56, said: This has as usual become a pointless discussion as some people just can’t get past their farang paranoia and choose to ignore the actual facts. It is unfortunate that they continue to infect other people with their half truths, illogical conjecture, and the anticipation that if they have not been victimized yet, they certainly will be some time in the future.
TH
Yes, you're correct, this a pointless discussion if readers (such as yourself) cannot assimilate data from a number of sources and compile the information as a basis for an intelligent opinion. Instead, you prefer to "flame" and discredit postings that do not agree with your own unsubstantiated opinions.
Don't be so naive to believe that the "letter of the law" in Thailand is followed to the degree that you've so implied. Who's operating on "half-truths"? You're quoting the "law" and seemingly do not possess the ability (or the intelligence) to consider, in actuality, how the laws are administered and the final outcome.
|
Sponsored by ...
|
0
