There is a lot of noise in Thailand's property market at the moment. Nominees, proxy shareholders, illegal landholding, crackdowns and investigations.
And, predictably, fear sells.
Suddenly we see developers, lawyers and advisers promoting what they describe as the only truly safe way for a foreigner to secure a house and land in Thailand: a registered 30-year lease.
Fair enough. For somebody buying a property today, leasehold may indeed be one of the structures worth considering.
But there is a rather large elephant standing in the room: What about the people who already own their homes? And then what?
Yesterday It Was a Company. Today It Is a Lease.
There is a certain irony in the current discussion. For decades, foreigners buying houses in Thailand were regularly introduced to the Thai limited-company structure. Not secretly and not in some dark back room.
Companies were registered, lawyers prepared the paperwork, accountants filed annual accounts, land transfers were registered, taxes were paid and government departments processed the documents. Thousands of foreign buyers followed professional advice and believed they were doing things properly.
Now, some of the same professional industry that helped create those structures is telling people:
"Company ownership is dangerous. A 30-year registered lease is the safe solution."
Okay. Perhaps for a new transaction.
But what exactly is the proposed solution for somebody who bought his home 10, 15 or 20 years ago? A family that has lived peacefully in Thailand for years, with children going to school here, proper visas, taxes being paid and money being spent in the Thai economy every single month?
What are these people supposed to do?
Sell The House?
This is the part nobody seems particularly keen to explain.
Should an existing homeowner panic and sell? Sell into a nervous market where thousands of other foreigners have suddenly been told that their ownership structure might be dangerous? Possibly accept a seriously reduced price simply because everyone has been frightened at the same time?
And then what?
Take the remaining money and buy another house under a 30-year lease? How exactly has that improved his life? He had a home yesterday. He sells it because somebody frightened him, and then spends the money buying the right to occupy somebody else's land for 30 years.
That is not a solution. At least, certainly not a universal one.
And an existing company-owned property cannot simply be magically transformed into a lease. There would have to be another legal transaction, another owner, costs, taxes and potentially another set of legal questions.
So again: And then what?
Let's Separate Enforcement From Hysteria
Thailand absolutely has the right to enforce its laws. If organised groups deliberately create hundreds of shell companies, use professional nominee shareholders, disguise foreign property-development businesses or manufacture shareholder structures purely to circumvent Thai law, the authorities are perfectly entitled to investigate them.
That is one thing.
But that is quite different from suggesting that every foreigner who lives in a house held through a Thai company should suddenly regard himself as a criminal, pack his bags and put his family home on the market.
That distinction is important.
The authorities themselves have made clear that identifying companies with foreign shareholders for screening does not automatically mean that every one of those companies is a nominee structure or is breaking the law. Ultimately, individual circumstances and the actual facts matter.
Unfortunately, fear does not always bother with those details.
Are There Risks? Of Course.
I am not suggesting that people should stick their heads in the sand. Nor am I suggesting that every company structure created during the past 20 years is automatically fine simply because a lawyer once prepared it.
The authorities have clearly increased their scrutiny of landholding companies, shareholder structures, sources of funds and the use of Thai shareholders. That is a reality and it should be taken seriously.
So this is certainly not an article saying: "Don't worry, nothing can possibly happen."
Nobody responsible should say that.
But neither should we jump from increased enforcement against questionable structures to the conclusion that ordinary foreign residents should immediately sell their family homes before the government comes to take them away.
That is an enormous leap. And, in my opinion, an irresponsible one.
Is Thailand Really Going To Empty Thousands Of Family Homes?
I don't believe so.
Let me be clear. I do not believe Thailand is about to launch a nationwide campaign to throw ordinary, peaceful, long-term foreign residents out of the homes in which they have lived with their families for many years.
That is my personal opinion, not a legal guarantee.
But economically, socially and practically, it simply would not make sense.
Imagine the consequences if thousands of frightened foreigners suddenly tried to sell their homes at the same time. Property values would fall, confidence would disappear and overseas buyers would think twice before investing here.
Existing residents might decide to take their money elsewhere. There would be fewer renovations, fewer gardeners, fewer domestic workers, fewer restaurant customers, fewer cars purchased and less foreign money circulating through local communities.
And what exactly would Thailand gain from that?
A country should absolutely deal with genuine criminal structures and deliberate abuse of its laws. But creating panic amongst ordinary residents who have lived here peacefully for decades would be something entirely different.
Thailand has spent many years encouraging foreigners to live here, retire here, invest here, travel here and spend their money here. I find it extremely difficult to believe that the desired end result of the present enforcement campaign is a mass exodus of exactly those people.
So What Should Existing Homeowners Do?
My view is remarkably uncomplicated: Don't panic.
Don't put your home on the market tomorrow because somebody sent you a frightening Facebook post.
Don't accept 30% less for your property because somebody tells you that you have to get out quickly.
And don't restructure a company overnight simply because another lawyer has suddenly discovered the latest "100% safe solution".
Most importantly, don't confuse marketing with legal advice.
If you genuinely have concerns about your existing structure, have it reviewed properly. Look at the shareholders, the source of the original funding, the accounting history and the underlying documents. Understand your own individual situation, rather than reacting to somebody else's horror story.
Every case is different.
And obviously, if you ever receive an actual inquiry, summons, order or communication from a government authority, do not ignore it. Obtain proper independent professional advice.
But absent that, my personal approach would be very simple: Stay put. Stay informed. See how this develops.
Because Something Has To Give
Thailand is now reaching the point where enforcement has to meet reality.
The authorities can identify abusive structures, prosecute organised nominee networks, tighten future transactions and demand better evidence where Thai shareholders are supposed to be genuine investors. All of that is understandable.
But eventually somebody also needs to answer the question facing thousands of existing homeowners:
What are ordinary people who bought years ago supposed to do now?
Because simply telling everybody, "From now on, take a 30-year lease," does absolutely nothing for the person who already owns his family home through a structure established 15 years ago.
There has to be a practical answer.
Perhaps that will eventually involve clearer compliance rules. Perhaps restructuring mechanisms. Perhaps transitional arrangements. Perhaps some form of regularisation for genuine residential homeowners.
I don't know. Nobody knows yet.
But I would not be surprised at all if a workable solution eventually emerges once policymakers fully appreciate how many perfectly normal families could otherwise be caught in this uncertainty.
Thailand has seen campaigns, announcements and crackdowns before. Sometimes they continue, sometimes they are modified, and sometimes enforcement becomes far more targeted once the practical consequences become apparent.
That is why panic is rarely a good strategy.
And Then What?
That remains my question to everybody currently shouting: "Thirty-year lease! Thirty-year lease! Thirty-year lease!"
Fine. For tomorrow's buyer, let's discuss it.
But what about yesterday's buyer? What about the man who bought his retirement home in 2008? What about the couple who have raised their children there? What about the foreign resident who has lived legally in Thailand for 20 years, paid his bills, paid his taxes and never hurt a fly?
Should he sell? At what price, and to whom? Where does he move next? Does he sell a home he has enjoyed for 15 years, take a substantial financial loss and then put the remaining money into a 30-year lease?
And then what?
Until somebody can answer those questions properly, my advice remains simple: Don't let fear make major financial decisions for you.
Stay calm, stay informed, make sure you understand your own structure and, unless there is a genuine reason requiring you to do otherwise, stay in your home.
Because enforcing Thailand's laws against deliberate nominee abuse is one thing. Turning thousands of ordinary, law-abiding foreign residents into collateral damage is quite another.
And I simply cannot believe that is where Thailand ultimately wants this to go.