You may have answered your own question there.....there are postive people in this world..and negative ones...we all make our own choices....but my guess is the negatives want to buy but can't make that leap..hence all their negative posts ......gaijin wrote:All the negative posts seem to come from those who do not own property in HH. All the positive posts are from those who have bought property in HH. Why is this so?
Retire and buy in the land of smiles.
- If you don't have a property and were thinking of or hoping to buy you would want as much negativity as possible to lower the price you pay.
If you already have a property and were thinking of or hoping to sell now or in the future you would want as much positivity as possible to raise the price you receive.
Very true - In my aging years one thing I have learned - people believe what they WANT to believe, the facts just get in the way
Hmmm. As a newbie here, well, when a topic is "done to death", reading it all gets confusing. It just looks like people have diverse opinions and disagree, sometimes in ugly ways.matthew80 wrote:this subject has been done to death...but not for the new people to this forum, who have legitimate questions and concerns! I have read many opening posts by rookies and many times the responses have been: "Done that subject to death! Do a search of the archives!" The tone has not exactly been welcoming.
There is an interim government at the moment, and from what I have read, there seems to be a lot of concern to think out what is best for Thailand, and put that into practice. The issue of foreign ownership is interpreted very differently in different countries. I heard that in Brazil and Argentina and South America any nationality can purchase property, you simply get a tax number. So the economy as a whole gets a boost. But in several Asian countries, the land may only be owned by nationals, it is a scarce resource, and a matter of dignity. I suspect the 51% rule is there for a reason. In an emergency, and on paper, land is owned by Thai nationals.
But I think the case of RETIREMENT, which is the title of the original post, Thailand has already changed laws to make foreigners welcome. Because immigration of the moderately wealthy is encouraged, provided you are over 50 and certain conditions are met, that creates a bunch of retired foreigners needing housing. Surely, whatever the literal interpretation of the original laws, the practice and eventually the laws themselves will tend to align with welcoming foreigners who retire, and easing ownership for foreigners?
Mahalo. They (The Thai Government) have changed the law twice to my knowledge in the past 5 years or less? Never for the betterment of retirees nor Farrangs married to Thais!But I think the case of RETIREMENT, which is the title of the original post, Thailand has already changed laws to make foreigners welcome. Because immigration of the moderately wealthy is encouraged, provided you are over 50 and certain conditions are met, that creates a bunch of retired foreigners needing housing. Surely, whatever the literal interpretation of the original laws, the practice and eventually the laws themselves will tend to align with welcoming foreigners who retire, and easing ownership for foreigners?
Go back and check!
¼Ã
Well said, Onlyme.
There are thousands of westerners who are "welcomed with open arms" each year.
Talk to them after they've been here for 10 years. I bet you'll hear a different version of events from them.
It's still a great county and I have my own problems with an extension to my visa.
Married to a Thai? "Piss off, give us all your money".
Retired? Well, I havn't got to the magical age yet, so I'll reserve judgement.
There are thousands of westerners who are "welcomed with open arms" each year.
Talk to them after they've been here for 10 years. I bet you'll hear a different version of events from them.
It's still a great county and I have my own problems with an extension to my visa.
Married to a Thai? "Piss off, give us all your money".
Retired? Well, I havn't got to the magical age yet, so I'll reserve judgement.
I would have said that was self-evident.
And I'm not saying it's bad.
Just the difference between people who have money to show as retirees and those who have to keep quiet with their Thai wives of many years.
Never mind, I'll wait until I'm 50 and can retire. The fact that I've lived here for 9 years already and am married to a Thai person dosn't seem to matter to the authorities.
Good luck to me and you.
And I'm not saying it's bad.
Just the difference between people who have money to show as retirees and those who have to keep quiet with their Thai wives of many years.
Never mind, I'll wait until I'm 50 and can retire. The fact that I've lived here for 9 years already and am married to a Thai person dosn't seem to matter to the authorities.
Good luck to me and you.
Some people have reasons for not wanting to buy but in general terms this comment I think is true in a lot of casesbig jimmy wrote:You may have answered your own question there.....there are postive people in this world..and negative ones...we all make our own choices....but my guess is the negatives want to buy but can't make that leap..hence all their negative posts ......gaijin wrote:All the negative posts seem to come from those who do not own property in HH. All the positive posts are from those who have bought property in HH. Why is this so?
onlyme is correct
unfortunatly onlyme is correct to the letter, as I've found out the hard way. I was quite surprised to see all the negative remarks toward him. I only wish onlyme was wrong.
Re: onlyme is correct
How do you mean?biglare wrote:unfortunatly onlyme is correct to the letter, as I've found out the hard way. I was quite surprised to see all the negative remarks toward him. I only wish onlyme was wrong.
Care to elaborate on your first post?
Yes, I lived in Samui for 6 years developing property. The first few developments went well and sold out even before the projects were completed. After the Banditos thing, where the dutch government warned the Thai police in Samui about a motorcycle gang laundering money, everything changed and the rule that allowed companies with thai nominees to purchase properties with a managing director making all moves and profits is no longer possible. The land office will no longer accept companies with falangs in control. Even though the Banditos thing turned out to be just a knee jerk reaction by the government and there was nothing to the charges of money laundering by buying and selling large plots of land, the land offices no longer accept the loophole with thai nominees. For years the loophole was acceptable and encouraged by virtually all Thai lawyers in Samui. Now the people with houses and plots of land have no way to sell them. I still have many plots of the most prime sea view land on the island and can't sell them because my customers are falang. My friends in phuket, Thai and Falang) are having the same problems.
Everyone is hoping the new elected government will find a way to make property available to falangs, but that's only a hope.
Now I play golf almost every day and wait, like many of my friends are doing. Samui has only one golf course so I'm looking at Hua Hin as a place to live. I have several friends living there now and tell me it's great.
Everyone is hoping the new elected government will find a way to make property available to falangs, but that's only a hope.
Now I play golf almost every day and wait, like many of my friends are doing. Samui has only one golf course so I'm looking at Hua Hin as a place to live. I have several friends living there now and tell me it's great.
Re: Retire and buy in the land of smiles.
Thanks, Onlyme. Very good advice which will likely be claimed false by RE agents. I've been telling farangs this for years and they all claim I have rocks in my head .. which is beside the point.Onlyme wrote:Here's a few things you ought to know before buying anything in Thailand!<snip>
READ THE NEXT PARAGRAPH VERY CAREFULLY!!!!!
As for land ownership through a company this action violates both the spirit and the letter of the law as it is expressly forbidden to use Thai nominee shareholders to act as ghost investors to allow a Farang to own land. This is not a loophole, it is simply committing a crime.
I always though the same thing, but was recently involved in a conversation with 2 Thais, one was a recently retired Permanent Secretary, who claimed that the 30 year limitation was only for property leased from the government.Onlyme wrote: The only legal way to control land and hence a house in Thailand is through a lease or a Usufruct. The only truly legally way to do this is to give a Thai citizen the money to buy the house, and then they lease it back to you. A 'lease' has a maximum tenure of 30 years
He went on to claim .. and the second Thai back up the comment .. that a 50 year lease was legal for private parties.
So now I'm really confused. Any Thai law legal eagles here that can comment accurately?
I suspect that a consultation with a respectable Thai RE lawyer could resolve these issues .. and further scare the h*** out of a number of Thai company holders.Norseman wrote:What facts?H2ODunc wrote:he was jumped on just for telling people facts????
Nothing but gossip and unfounded old rumours, but, that's only my personal view of course.
Instead of all the whines, posturing and personal attacks, why not get the truth? Is it because you don't really want to know the truth?
While you may feel secure with your Thai companies, nominees and interlocking directorates wrapped around you; if a Thai with any stroke ever decides to do so, he can bring down your house of cards.