Thread: houses in trust funds for thai kids

I don't think so, kids have no legal responsibility so it would probably need overseaing from 7 Thais.

Might as well let the kid have a shot. More chance of him succeeding than 7 Thais.

Generally, Thai law does not acknowledge the concept of trust law.

i have been told from another source, this is possible. the Thai kid cannot own the house or land until they are 18, so it goes into the care of a trust.
DD if what you are saying is true, that would mean if a very rich thai were to die, leaving his only child. the kid would have no claim to its inheritance(sp)
obviously, if the kid were under 18 the money and property owned by the rich parent would go in to a trust, no?
not saying this is fact, but i know there are a few knowledgable folk on this forum that might be able to give a little advicve.
i would presume a trust is managed by a firm of lawyers.

sorry, william you posted at the same time, can you explain a little more.
what happens in the case of death when the only family member is a child?

^^it's not a "trust" in its purest form but rather is a guardianship. In the case of a minor who is legal owner of property, the property in question cannot be sold or disposed of without a court order.

You would not establish a trust to do this though as Thai law simply doesn't acknowledge this. To create the kind of legal relationship you are talking about would be a guardianship

CC: You would leave the property to the child in the will and then nominate a guardian. Insofar as land is concerned, the court would then supervise any disposal thereof to ensure the child's best interests are being taken into account.

^
Does that only apply in the case of willed property?

^intestate property is a tough call simply because of the number of potential claimants you could have. If you own property (wherever that be), it's always advisable that you put your affairs in order and have a will

thanks for your input will, so the next question would be, is it possible to put a house in a kids name with the mother being the legal guardian.
As if it were a gift from me to my child?
in which case, if the worst were to happen it would be less easy to pull a fast one!
slightly off topic, will but my missus has studied law (thai) she says even though the law says i could not own anything, as long as i can prove the original money to buy a house came from my past legal earnnigs, i would be entitled to get it back, if we were to get divorced and there was no foul play in the split.
at worst i would be entitled to 50% of all we own.
thing is william i don't belive this, what do you think?

Originally Posted by classic-chassis

thanks for your input will, so the next question would be, is it possible to put a house in a kids name with the mother being the legal guardian.

yes. Depending on the Land Department in question the process can be lengthy and I would advise you take along a lawyer, but it is possible.

Originally Posted by classic-chassis

As if it were a gift from me to my child?

tough one this. I'm assuming you're saying the purchase price is a gift to the child, rather than the property (read land), which you wouldn't necessarily be able to own. Basically, under the amendment to the Land Code that allows luk-krueng children to own land in Thailand I would think this was doable. Again, depending on the land department, the process could be lengthy

Originally Posted by classic-chassis

in which case, if the worst were to happen it would be less easy to pull a fast one!

if the property is in your child's name neither you nor anyone else could sell that property without a court order. So, yes, it would be more difficult to dispose of. However, it may be possible to get a loan/mortgage secured on the property, so you would need to look at this aspect carefully too.

Originally Posted by classic-chassis

slightly off topic, will but my missus has studied law (thai) she says even though the law says i could not own anything, as long as i can prove the original money to buy a house came from my past legal earnnigs, i would be entitled to get it back, if we were to get divorced and there was no foul play in the split.
at worst i would be entitled to 50% of all we own.
thing is william i don't belive this, what do you think?

I've also heard lawyers mention this too. Frankly I believe the chances of this happening are slim. Slimmer now that the government is cracking down on "nominee" structures. The wording in the amendment to the Land Code is very specific in stating that the money must belong to he wife (if the property is registered in the wife's name). That said, one poster on another forum was adamant that he (his lawyer) had managed to pull this off. Putting the property in the child's name may make this more of an interesting question though.

But, the truth is that no one could guarantee you that any structure is going to protect you 100%, so if you have any doubt whatsoever about the purchase, you shouldn't do it. I'm afraid to say that it really is that simple to me.

Thai law appears to be about as clear as mud.
I don't envy you William.

CMN not only is it as clear as mud it seems to change with the wind.

Originally Posted by classic-chassis

is it possible to buy a house out right and put it in the kids name via a trust fund of some kind? obviously the kid is a thai national.

Get a lawyer.

funny thig is dave i have one already...she's my wife!! i have double the trouble most blokes do, i don't trust my thai wife with all i own (don't trust anyone with all i own, besides my father and that only coz he doesn't need the money) and i definately don't trust lawyers......sorry william

opps!

CC: not trusting lawyers is a very healthy attitude to have Not trusting Thai lawyers can be life-saving

Anymore outcome on this ? seems a good idea to have some of the assets that cant be owned outright in the kids names .

I have 2 comments to make on this.. One of the houses I own was owned by a Thai boy whos family bought it for him.. He was 18. Since he was not 20, he was not of legal age to sell it. But once he got married he is considered legal age. So in order to sell it to me he went to the office, paid the 23B, got married and was now legal to sell it. WHich he did.

Another situation. A friend bought a house with his thai wife. After they bought it they got divorced. Because it was a marriage asset, she had to sell it and give him his share of the money back. This was the courts decision.

Originally Posted by whosyourdaddy

Another situation. A friend bought a house with his thai wife. After they bought it they got divorced. Because it was a marriage asset, she had to sell it and give him his share of the money back. This was the courts decision.

WYD:

I've also heard this. I must say I have never experienced it. The ruling I heard, however, went like this:

Land belong to Thai wife
House, which a foreigner can own, was a marriage asset.

Wife was ordered to pay half the value of the house. When she said she could not, she had to sell house and land, but husband only got half the value of the house.

I think you would need a very understanding judge though. And I wouldn't be very confident that you would get the same ruling in Korat and Bangkok - but I could be wrong

I know of a english guy that set something of this nature up. Dont know the all details but said he did it . The mother had taken off and left the kid and I think she signed a paper saying he was the guardian

Originally Posted by William

Generally, Thai law does not acknowledge the concept of trust law.

Ouch! I'm a two-thirds beneficiary of two UK assets held in separate trusts, and both of these equities remain intact and addressed in my UK will, as is the rest of my estate in the UK. This will makes no reference to the existence of a Thai will, because at the time I made it I did not have a Thai will.

Now, my Thai will addresses only assets held within Thai jurisdiction; it mentions the existence of the UK will but makes no reference to its content.

So far so good, except, in my UK will one of the UK trust equities is subject to a condition, which if unsatisfied leaves that equity to be disposed to a Thai charity that incidentally also benefits under my Thai will from the residue of my Thai estate.

Now, as Thai law does not acknowledge trust law, which I have just learned, do I need to and if so how would I ensure that, if the conditional part needs to be disbursed in Thailand, that this will be done?

It seems logical that I do not need to do anything at all, though logic sometimes has little bearing in legal matters, because all UK assets are properly allocated and it is the responsibility of my UK trustee to comply with the terms of my UK will, so if known conditions leave any part of the estate to be disposed to any person or organisation anywhere in the world, then that is precisely what he should do, and as far as Thai law is concerned there is no trust and therefore nothing to not acknowledge.

I can't hardly imagine Thai resistance to incoming, but otherwise, what have I overlooked?

You're a font of current knowledge; now they're considering inheritance tax? Whatever next!

I recall shuddering whilst in the UK, upon hearing a radio news snippet that the (post coup) government had declared their determination to "focus on making the people happy, rather than on the economy."

Many thanks.