#  >  > Living And Legal Affairs In Thailand >  >  > Doing Things Legally >  >  > Williams Legal Section >  >  Amendment to the Condominium Act (Foreign Ownership)

## AntRobertson

The Condominium Act 1979 has been amended recently. Basically (very) the effect is that it has reaffirmed the provision for the foreign ownership quota to 49% of the entire area in each condominium building. 

It also seeks to make it easier for foreigners to register a condo unit it their name. Where previously a certificate of remittance of funds was required as proof of source of funds when purchasing condominium units you may now also provide any of the following:

1. Document showing the remittance of funds to Thailand for the purpose of purchasing a condominium unit (e.g. "Foreign Exchange Transaction Form");

2. Document showing the withdrawal of funds from a Thai Baht bank account of a non-resident (e.g. foreigners who purchase and acquire ownership of the condominium unit); and

3. Document showing the withdrawal of funds from a non-resident deposit bank account.

In all cases the amount of the funds remitted or withdrawn will have to be equal to or should exceed the total purchase price of the condominium unit.

----------


## good2bhappy

So in other words you can now buy a condo from money in Thailand and have it in your name?
But you could do that before? I thought that you were unable to take the money back overseas if you did that. Can you now?

----------


## AntRobertson

> So in other words you can now buy a condo from money in Thailand and have it in your name?


Pretty much the sum of it, yep.  Previously you had to show that the money had been brought in from overseas ("certificate of remittance of funds").




> I thought that you were unable to take the money back overseas if you did that. Can you now?


Sorry you've lost me there, you mean after you've sold the unit?  There's no restriction on moving the money in any event that I'm aware of (other than exchange rate losses and the like which are par for the course anyways).

----------


## Loy Toy

All looking a little bit more positive and for the future ant.

Hope they change the rules and allow a foreigner, with the correct qualifications to buy no more than 1 rai of land and for the purpose to build one  house.

Recession over, well in growth areas anyway and for me if it comes about.  :Smile:

----------


## AntRobertson

> All looking a little bit more positive and for the future ant.


I agree mate. Another step in the right direction, albeit a baby step!  :Smile: 

One other thing I left off is that they also tidied up the provisions relating to the '5yr exemption' some condos had on foreign ownership over 49% - effect is that the foreigner owners now have secure title regardless.

----------


## Norton

> Hope they change the rules and allow a foreigner, with the correct qualifications to buy no more than 1 rai of land and for the purpose to build one house.


Makes a lot of economic sense to the country but for now I think a little too politically sensitive to introduce.  Prevalent mind set in your average Thai is if allowed, foreigners would by up the whole country.  Clearly an unrealistic assumption but that's the way they feel.  Will take some more time but I believe limited land ownership will be allowed at some point in the future.

----------


## Khun Custard

Yep, and just by coincidence,  the BANK OF BANGKOK has closed it's Thai Mortgage office in Singapore and has now based it at the Silom Rd HO - well, the Trinity building to be precise.

*A change to assist us - I think not!!*

Now, the BoB will not loan *less* than Tb10,000,000 for mortgages to foreigners. 
A 30% deposit required.
The repayment schedule is geared to 65 years of age and will certainly put the breaks on the 55yo + Thai romance retirees industry

Personally, I'm not and will never be after a Tb 10m Condo (unless the '97 crash occurs again) so it would appear BoB is doing a bit of social engineering based on wealth and perhaps age?????????????????? .

It was not that long ago on this forum there was reference to a newspaper article statement by an official of the BoB that basically stated foreigners were not welcome.  Something along the lines of "the number of older foreigners marrying Thai's  is turning the country's  womanhood it prostitutes"  

Guess who's' just closed all our BoB accounts  :Smile: 

Any one know of a Thai bank who likes our money and genuinely wants to assist ???

----------


## AntRobertson

> Prevalent mind set in your average Thai is if allowed, foreigners would by up the whole country. Clearly an unrealistic assumption but that's the way they feel.


To be fair they're not alone in that, very much a similar sentiment in New Zealand.  Foreign ownership was allowed some time back but in a lot of cases under very strict limitations.

That singer Shania Twain(sp?) recently purchased a high-country property and had to agree to a truckload of restrictions and caveats (things like no extra buildings, building a public access track etc).

----------


## Norton

> To be fair they're not alone in that, very much a similar sentiment in New Zealand.


The mindset is present in many countries.  I well remember in the 80s when there was a big movement in the US to prevent the Japanese from "buying America".  Just another case of the "common" man being mislead by the media reporting of a few high profile sales to Japanese companies.

----------


## AntRobertson

> Just another case of the "common" man being mislead by the media reporting of a few high profile sales to Japanese companies


Exactly.  Very much same scenario in NZ.

----------


## Loy Toy

> Originally Posted by Loy Toy
> 
> Hope they change the rules and allow a foreigner, with the correct qualifications to buy no more than 1 rai of land and for the purpose to build one house.
> 
> 
> Makes a lot of economic sense to the country but for now I think a little too politically sensitive to introduce. Prevalent mind set in your average Thai is if allowed, foreigners would by up the whole country. Clearly an unrealistic assumption but that's the way they feel. Will take some more time but I believe limited land ownership will be allowed at some point in the future.


Agree Norton 100%

The qualifications (and for for foreigners to buy land) could be tailored to keep the riff raff out and not see the sell off of Thailand and as follows;

For younger applicants>
1. Have a work permit (uninterrupted) here for at least 5 years.
2. Be married with at least one child with the child going to school here.
3. Buy the property outright and without any bank borrowings or mortgage.
4. Limit the number of permits per year and according to the permanent resident status application approvals system.
5. To apply for a permanent resident status.

For retiress>
1. Be financially secure.
2. Buy the property outright and without any finance.
3. Hold proper health insurances etc.
4. Apply for permanent resident status.

Just a few ideas that should not offend any Thai.

----------


## chitown

I would be happy with owning 50% of the house and being protected in the case of divorce. They could have a clause that as long as you are married, you can own 50% of the house. If you divorce, the house needs to be sold and the proceeds divided 50 -50.  :Smile:

----------


## Norton

> If you divorce, the house needs to be sold and the proceeds divided 50 -50. __________________


Sounds familiar! :Smile:

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> 2. Be married with at least one child with the child going to school here.


Why the hell should you have to breed to own a house? Ridiculous suggestion.

----------


## chitown

> Originally Posted by chitown
> 
> If you divorce, the house needs to be sold and the proceeds divided 50 -50. __________________
> 
> 
> Sounds familiar!


As many times as I have divided my assets, it is very familiar.  :Smile:

----------


## lysander

> So in other words you can now buy a condo from money in Thailand and have it in your name?
> 			
> 		
> 
> Pretty much the sum of it, yep.  Previously you had to show that the money had been brought in from overseas ("certificate of remittance of funds").
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought that if you wanted to move the proceeds of a condo sale back out of the country you had to have ceritified that you'd used proceeds transferred from abroad to buy it originally? I thought that was the whole purpose of getting the certification in the first place.

----------


## AntRobertson

^ I'm not exactly sure on that one to be honest lysander, you've got me there.

Sounds a bit odd though; placing a restriction on funds transfer like that.

----------


## Loy Toy

> Originally Posted by AntRobertson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				So in other words you can now buy a condo from money in Thailand and have it in your name?
> ...


 Not quite sure mate but I believe these documents are called "Sarm Sor" documents. These are the documents awarded verifying that funds have been brought into the country and for the purpose of buying a condo.

----------


## EmperorTud

False hope.

----------


## EmperorTud

> Agree Norton 100%  The qualifications (and for for foreigners to buy land) could be tailored to keep the riff raff out and not see the sell off of Thailand and as follows;  For younger applicants> 1. Have a work permit (uninterrupted) here for at least 5 years. 2. Be married with at least one child with the child going to school here. 3. Buy the property outright and without any bank borrowings or mortgage. 4. Limit the number of permits per year and according to the permanent resident status application approvals system. 5. To apply for a permanent resident status.  For retiress> 1. Be financially secure. 2. Buy the property outright and without any finance. 3. Hold proper health insurances etc. 4. Apply for permanent resident status.  Just a few ideas that should not offend any Thai.


That sounds typically Thai. 

Who gives a feck about offending them?

They are snapping up land and businesses in our countries quick enough.

----------


## AntRobertson

> False hope.


What is?

----------


## EmperorTud

> Originally Posted by EmperorTud
> 
> 
> False hope.
> 
> 
> What is?





> All looking a little bit more positive and for the future ant. Hope they change the rules and allow a foreigner, with the correct qualifications to buy no more than 1 rai of land and for the purpose to build one house.





> Another step in the right direction





> I believe limited land ownership will be allowed at some point in the future.





> I would be happy with owning 50% of the house and being protected in the case of divorce.


As long as Thailand has a Monarchy increased rights for foreigners owning land is merely a pipedream.

----------


## Spin

> Hope they change the rules and allow a foreigner, with the correct qualifications to buy no more than 1 rai of land and for the purpose to build one  house.


It wouldn't kill them would it? maybe even do it as a lottery for XXX amount of rai per year. That would bring me intp the market as i dont want any assets here that I cannot control 100%.

----------


## AntRobertson

> As long as Thailand has a Monarchy increased rights for foreigners owning land is merely a pipedream.


I disagree.  This is the, from memory, 3rd amendment to the Condominium Act since it was first passed; each amendment has progressively relaxed restrictions.  Land ownership, once covered by a blanket exclusion on foreign ownership, now has certain allowances for foreign ownership.  So there are already increased rights for foreigners owning land.

Full ownership rights and clear title is not going to happen overnight but it will happen.  The progessively relaxed legislation clearly shows this.

----------


## EmperorTud

> Full ownership rights and clear title is not going to happen overnight but it will happen.


Not while Thailand has a monarchy and the CPB are by far the biggest beneficiaries of the current situation, not to mention the biggest landowners in the country.




> Land ownership, once covered by a blanket exclusion on foreign ownership, now has certain allowances for foreign ownership.


Such as? 

BOI doesn't count.

----------


## AntRobertson

> Originally Posted by AntRobertson
> 
> Full ownership rights and clear title is not going to happen overnight but it will happen.
> 
> 
> Not while Thailand has a monarchy and the CPB are by far the biggest beneficiaries of the current situation, not to mention the biggest landowners in the country.


Well Thailand does have a monarchy and land ownership restrictions have been progressively relaxed. It's a matter of record and there in the legislation.  Granted the concessions have been small and far apart but the point is that they have been made.  This thread's an example of another.




> Land ownership, once covered by a blanket exclusion on foreign ownership, now has certain allowances for foreign ownership.


BOI does count actually.  It's an example of exactly what I'm referring to in the progressive allowances for foreigners to own land, you can't just dismiss it because you decide it doesn't count.  :Confused: 

Off the top of my head there's also the allowance for ownership of 1 rai for residential purposes under investment in Govt. bonds or some such too.  Can't think of any others right now, would have to research it.

----------


## EmperorTud

> Well Thailand does have a monarchy and land ownership restrictions have been progressively relaxed.


No, they haven't. It is the big man's wish to keep Thailand for the Thai and part of his self-sufficiency economy policy.




> This thread's an example of another.


No, this thread is about a small change in condo ownership law, nothing to do with land.




> BOI does count actually. It's an example of exactly what I'm referring to in the progressive allowances for foreigners to own land, you can't just dismiss it because you decide it doesn't count.


The only reason these concessions were made was to encourage investment in much needed areas, and again, it is the company that owns the land, not the foreigner, hence it doesn't count. The company can be foreign owned, but subject to BOI approval.




> Off the top of my head there's also the allowance for ownership of 1 rai for residential purposes under investment in Govt. bonds or some such too.


With a ludicrous investment of 40 million THB?

----------


## AntRobertson

> Originally Posted by AntRobertson
> 
> Well Thailand does have a monarchy and land ownership restrictions have been progressively relaxed.
> 
> 
> No, they haven't. It is the big man's wish to keep Thailand for the Thai and part of his self-sufficiency economy policy.


I'm sorry but they have, it's a matter of record and legislative amendments.  

The exclusion initally allowed for no foreign ownership of land or condo's.  It now does under certain restrictions and conditions.  You can argue against that all you like but it changes that fact not one iota.

----------


## EmperorTud

> I'm sorry but they have, it's a matter of record and legislative amendments.


No, it's not.

A Thai company that is majority owned by foreigners can legally own land only if approved by the BOI.

This was a change in the law to encourage business in the interests of the country and environment, such as recycling, ecologically friendly farming etc. It was not intended to facilitate foreign ownership of land although that is a by-product of the BOI legislation. 

The proposed tightening of the FBA was, amongst other things, directly aimed at stopping foreigners using shell companies to buy and own land by tightening the legislation on nominee shareholders.

If anything owning land has become more difficult with scrutiny on these companies.

As I said outright ownership of land is only a dream while Thailand remains a Constitutional Monarchy, for obvious reasons.

----------


## good2bhappy

Weren't British people allowed to own land in the 1860's?

----------


## AntRobertson

^^You're just being specious now. Fact of the matter is that there have been successive amendments to the legislation that have narrowed the original blanket exclusion on foreigners owning land.

The tightening of the FBA as you mention was to close a loop-hole that was being exploited, it was never intended to be used that way so was not a legitimate avenue to begin with. It's misleading to present that as a further restriction. There's otherwise a clear pattern of the restrictions moving toward an opening of the 'market', not the opposite. Check the legislation if you don't believe me. It may not happen in the next 10, 20 or even 30yrs but it is happening. 

That this has or will not have been fast enough or wide enough for your own personal liking is entirely beside the point.

----------


## EmperorTud

For every law and piece of legislation you claim shows Thailand is moving towards opening the market to allow foreigners to own land I can produce several that show the exact opposite, such as the cancelling of the investment visa and tightening of the FBA as previously mentioned  appear to be the two biggest recent indicators.

Those are just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are many more.

----------


## AntRobertson

> For every law and piece of legislation you claim shows Thailand is moving towards opening the market to allow foreigners to own land I can produce several that show the exact opposite


Fine go ahead, be my guest.

Perhaps you'd like to start your own thread on it.  This one was intended to advise of a change to the legislation for anyone that might be interested.  Predictably your presence on it has taken it down a well-trodden path.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## EmperorTud

You may also be interested to know that the King's very own name, Bhumibol, means 'strength of the land'.

----------


## EmperorTud

> Perhaps you'd like to start your own thread on it.


Why? My point was to correct those posters such as yourself who erroneously believe Thailand will allow foreigners to own land while it remains a Constitutional Monarchy.

A belief based on nothing more than wishful thinking.

----------


## AntRobertson

Well just as well you're always here to set everyone straight with the benefit of your all-seeing, all-knowing insight then isn't it.  I for one would be utterly at a loss without you.

----------


## EmperorTud

> Well just as well you're always here to set everyone straight with the benefit of your all-seeing, all-knowing insight then isn't it. I for one would be utterly at a loss without you.


Childish remarks aside, it was obvious that you know little about the King's vision of localism for Thailand and his desire to further limit foreign investment and influence in Thailand including foreign ownership of land.

----------


## AntRobertson

_"Blah, blah, blah I know more than you, blah, blah, blah Thailand sucks, blah, blah, blah my sunny and cheerful disposition is my greatest feature, blah, blah, blah I'm not at all a tedious and miserable cnut... Oh, did I mention Thailand sucks?  Well it does..."_

__

----------


## EmperorTud

> _"Blah, blah, blah I know more than you, blah, blah, blah Thailand sucks, blah, blah, blah my sunny and cheerful disposition is my greatest feature, blah, blah, blah I'm not at all a tedious and miserable cnut... Oh, did I mention Thailand sucks?  Well it does..."_
> 
> __


Translation: I have lost yet another argument.

----------


## AntRobertson

Can any Mod lurking please split these posts and this tedious, miserable Scottish cnut off from this thread?

Cheers.

----------


## good2bhappy

How do you ET know the King's mind?

----------


## EmperorTud

> How do you ET know the King's mind?


I know his vision of localism for Thailand.

He's clearly expressed his views and wishes on many an occasion.

----------


## good2bhappy

> the King's vision of localism for Thailand and his desire to further limit foreign investment and influence in Thailand including foreign ownership of land.


Could you be a little more precise?

----------


## good2bhappy

> I know his vision of localism for Thailand.


Really?
Wish to inform us?

----------


## EmperorTud

> Could you be a little more precise?





> Really? Wish to inform us?


Are you honestly trying to tell me you know nothing of the King's Sufficiency Economy policy?

Google is your friend.

----------


## good2bhappy

Are you saying that in The King's Sufficiency Economy Theory he specifically states "NO FOREIGN OWNERSHIP"?

----------


## EmperorTud

> Are you saying that in The King's Sufficiency Economy Theory he specifically states "NO FOREIGN OWNERSHIP"?


It is part of the big picture yes. 

Foreign influence, holdings and investment are to be tightly monitored and even in some cases reduced and eradicated altogether. 

Of course this is at complete odds with Thaksinomics but it has been demonstrated recently who really wears the trousers.

----------


## good2bhappy

^ sorry I googled it as you suggested but can't find that quote.

----------


## EmperorTud

> sorry I googled it as you suggested but can't find that quote.


What quote?

You do know what localism is don't you?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## good2bhappy

*Philosophy of the "Sufficiency Economy"*"Sufficiency Economy" is a philosophy that stresses the middle path as the overriding principle for appropriate conduct by the populace at all levels. This applies to conduct at the level of the individual, families, and communities, as well as to the choice of a balanced development strategy for the nation so as to modernise in line with the forces of globalisation while shielding against inevitable shocks and excesses that arise. "Sufficiency" means moderation and due consideration in all modes of conduct, as well as the need for sufficient protection from internal and external shocks. To achieve this, the application of knowledge with prudence is essential. In particular, great care is needed in the utilisation of untested theories and methodologies for planning and implementation. At the same time, it is essential to strengthen the moral fibre of the nation, so that everyone, particularly public officials, theorists and businessmen, adheres first and foremost to the principles of honesty and integrity. In addition, a balanced approach combining patience, perseverance, diligence, wisdom and prudence is indispensable to cope appropriately with critical challenges arising from extensive and rapid socioeconomic, environmental, and cultural changes occurring as a result of globalisation. 1
1 The 1999 TDRI Year-end Conference Distribution Material


This is what I read could you help me by pointing me in the direction of your particular knowledge?

----------


## EmperorTud

Hmm, reading that nonsense above it is apparent why you don't know what the policy actually is!

The sufficiency economy policy is localism. 

The philosophy has been made corporeal by Pridiyathorn Devakula, Minister of Finance, who proclaims he is the supporter of the King's self-sufficiency economy or Localism. The examples of his policies that follow the King's localism are: Limiting foreign companies investments that enormously reduce liquidity in Thai economy; regulation and investigation of foreigners' source of fund; and Capital controls that destroyed US$20 billion of market value in one day. As a consequence of capitol control and investigation over foreign investors, World Trade Organization (WTO) sent negative feedback to Thailand and doubts the ability of Thailand to continue to be the WTO member [3]. The prime minister Surayud Chulanont, who also proclaims the King's localism, has called for the former minister of commerce Somkid Jatusripitak, who are pro-capitalism, to the service of the country.

Localism in Thailand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

----------


## EmperorTud

Another good article.

																	Shinawatra's legacy,                                Thailand's new military-appointed government is                                indeed leading the country in a fundamentally                                different economic direction. Foreign investors                                and the market-fundamentalist Western media have                                roundly blasted Bangkok's recent decisions to                                impose capital controls, limit foreign ownership                                for certain service-sector investments, and                                broadly implement King Bhumibol Adulyadej's                                untested "sufficiency economy" concept.

Thailand's new direction is                                partially a nationalistic reaction to that bitter                                experience, driven a decade later by traditional                                elites now represented in government. The                                prevailing confusion surrounding the sudden                                implementation of capital controls and                                anti-foreign amendments to the Foreign Business                                Act, followed by earnest assurances by senior                                officials that Thailand will continue to engage                                with the global economy, has purposefully                                obfuscated the government's inward-looking                                intentions. 

Asia Times Online :: Southeast Asia news - Thailand's new economic logic

----------


## good2bhappy

But was that expressly stated by HRM himself? Or is that an interpretation?
The question is based on your statements regarding your knowledge of HRM's mind.

----------


## good2bhappy

> I know his vision of localism for Thailand.





> He's clearly expressed his views and wishes on many an occasion.


These are your own words.

----------


## good2bhappy

it should read "many occasions"

----------


## AntRobertson

> But was that expressly stated by HRM himself? Or is that an interpretation?
> The question is based on your statements regarding your knowledge of HRM's mind.


That's the thing innit, this policy that he's linked directly to the King by virtue of his intimate knowledge.  This is what he left off from his cut 'n pastes:




> There have been the efforts by military junta government to incorporate the King's 'Sufficiency Economy' (Localism) in the national economic policy. The criticism is directed towards the military junta government, i.e., to the practitioners not to the principle itself. The ineffective uses of the philosophy/principle are criticized as (a) The philosophy is not consistent with Thailand economic development, (b) nobody understands it and there are several unclear interpretations, (c) Other theories have historic academic ground


And of the article:




> Note
> It should be noted here that the _Asian Times'_s article "the King's 'Sufficiency Economy' (Localism)" is not the right quote and is led to be misunderstood. "Sufficiency Economy" calls for partial localism - a quarter - not the whole[_citation needed_]. In other words, "sufficiency economy" is meant to be "partial" localism. It is true that many parts of Thailand still enjoy capitalism. "Sufficiency Economy" calls on those to practice "some" localism particularly those in the rural areas.[_citation needed_] However, the oppositions see no different between "Sufficiency Economy" and "Self-sufficient economy", i.e., they are the same as Localism [5]. Kevin Hewison describes the self-sufficient political agenda in Thailand as Populist Localism.

----------

