As mentioned above, the last two decades have seen multiple changes in the government in Thailand. In fact, Thailand has undergone three major changes since 2006, including two military coups, and seen 10 different prime ministers.

When regimes change, the whole political outlook of a country changes. What had been a focus of enforcement could be put on the back burner as the new government asserts its own priorities. Likewise, previously overlooked transgressions can become the focal point for a new regime.

The degree of disdain for those flouting the law varies from regime to regime. Indeed, the crackdown in 2006 only lasted four months, until a military coup unseated Prime Minister Thaksin, who was spearheading a strict enforcement of land ownership laws.

During that brief four-month window, some land and villa owners were forced to dissolve companies and sell their land or property. Others escaped punishment once the regime changed. That cooling off period continued through a succession of regime changes up until the present day.

With the current government demonstrating considerably greater staying power, it is anyone’s guess if they will make this their focus in the near future.

Websites, brochures and flyers have long touted foreign land ownership in Thailand as easily attainable by setting up a Thai Company. In Phuket alone there are literally hundreds of sales booths, shops and stands, most of which are offering the same solution.

This singular mantra is repeated until it sadly receives an undeserved aura of respectability. Many in the real estate industry tell the buyer what they want to hear, and so the mantra is repeated over and over to potential buyers.

We have already noted how difficult it is to challenge established beliefs. How can someone disbelieve a message (however incorrect) which has been “reinforced” by multiple sources? The industry has even evolved to the extent that villa developments (marketing to foreigners) regularly win respected property awards, adding further positive reinforcement to the narrative. (Occasionally, as reported by Thailand Property News, developers are actually brazen enough to invent an award, simply declaring one their buildings to be “Condo of the Year.”)

Caveat Emptor means “let the buyer beware”. One might think the outlay of hundreds of thousands of Dollars, Euros, Pounds or millions of Renminbi or Roubles would make most buyers more inquisitive. Bizarrely, this is not always the case.

What happens when a new arrival to Thailand reads articles discussing a law firm which has been raided? Or hears a news item about a group of foreigners who have had their day in court, but lost in their attempt to defend a complex ownership structure?

The first thing they do is call the lawyer (or more likely, the accountant) who set up their Thai Company and arranged their villa purchase. When that professional individual is either willing to obfuscate the facts, or is ignorant of the facts, then the foreign owner is often left feeling bullet proof.

Every story they hear about illegal ownership then becomes wrong in their eyes, and every other foreigner they meet who buys a property through a Thai company with nominee shareholders perpetuates a false confirmation bias.

Jim Thompson was the American credited with reviving the silk industry in Thailand. He first travelled to Thailand in 1945, and like many who visit the country, ended up spending the rest of his life here. In later years, he designed and constructed a house on the Khlong Saen Saep, which was an architectural marvel inits day, and as a museum remains one of the most popular tourist attractions in Bangkok. At the time, however, he owned it. He bought the land and he put a house on it.

Foreign tourists have been flocking to Thailand for decades, but since 1970 (three years after Jim Thompson’s mysterious disappearance), foreigners have not been allowed to own land.

English language newspapers, forum sand chat rooms have been cautioning readers for years not to be fooled into illegal property purchases, but many still choose to ignore the warning. While there are also those who are “fresh off the boat” and receiving bad advice, very few English-speakers are completely oblivious to the fact that they cannot own villas or land in Thailand as a foreigner.

Sadly, the same cannot be said for Chinese and Russian tourists/investors. Russians have only been coming to Phuket in large numbers for the last ten years, and the significant growth in Chinese tourism only happened in the last five years. Many Russians and Chinese are therefore unaware of the previous efforts to enforce illegal ownership, perhaps because no one has ever bothered to tell them. Having no frame of reference, they are unfortunately more easily misled, and do not know what structures are above board and which are not.

There does not appear to be a comparable social network campaign in either Russian or Mandarin to inform people about the laws regarding foreign land ownership. It is possible that one reason why this information has not reached the Russian or Chinese blogospheres is that those writing online about Phuket Property did not experience the last crackdown, and are not familiar with the letter vs. the spirit of the law. Instead, the buyers – and perhaps the bloggers, too – are relying on the advice of individuals who are either oblivious to the facts, or incentivised not to tell the whole story.

Another issue impacting Russian and Chinese buyers is a cultural one, specifically the culture surrounding the use of Lawyers.

We mentioned above that Thai Property Law is rooted in a cultural attachment to land remaining in Thai hands. What we have learned from speaking with Russians and Chinese in Phuket is that, in their cultures, lawyers are usually not involved when buying or selling a property back home.

In fact, many Chinese nationals have been willing to part with money in China, and without leaving their country, have been handed the keys to a property purchased in Phuket. This has allowed some developers and agents to getaway with selling property that an experienced lawyer would have likely advised against buying. The fact that conducting due diligence and hiring a lawyer is not commonplace in China means developers can sell condominium units to unsuspecting buyers in the same way cheap and faulty goods can be hawked online.

Some Russian and Chinese individuals could therefore “come unstuck” with their property transactions in Thailand, simply because they didn’t appreciate the need for using a lawyer.

In 1970, when the last treaty allowing foreigners to buy land expired, around 350,000 tourists visited Thailand every year. Today that figure is 35 million, and a large number of those visit Phuket each year.

When the tourist numbers were lower, the foreigners buying villas were barely noticeable. The authorities could almost turn a blind eye to the relatively small number of foreigners circumnavigating the laws. In many cases they did, mainly because no one complained.

But as foreign interest in acquiring Thai property steadily increased, the resentment among Thai nationals grew stronger. Anyone who believes that the government will sit idly by and watch the laws of the Kingdom be openly flouted forever is demonstrating a complete ignorance of the depth of feeling which the Thai people have toward foreigners attempting to buy their land.

As with any industry, when it comes to law firms, you get what you pay for.

Someone preparing for a camping trip, for example, knows they need weather-proof outerwear because the conditions they face will be unpredictable. When deciding what brand to buy, maybe they take the attitude “weather-proof gear is all the same” and choose the cheapest option. And maybe the week they spent in bed with the flu because their apparel was not truly wind or waterproof could have been avoided by spending a little more money.

Hiring a lawyer in Thailand is a little like that—you need one who can help you weather any storm, and it is usually the more experienced lawyers who can do this.

When Thailand saw an unprecedented boom in tourism, a boom in property sales soon followed. We’ve already discussed the solution that was presented to foreigners who wanted to buy a villa in Phuket (Thai companies with nominee shareholders), and we’ve already made it clear that this violated the law. But the advice was commonplace.

After 2006, most experienced law firms stopped recommending the use of nominee structures. This should be a relief to their clients because for the first time ever, the State Auditors Department, The Land Department, Board of Investment and Department of Business Development, the Crime Suppression Division (CSD) and the Department of Special Investigations (DSI) all appear to be cooperating with one another.

This unique example of multi-agency collaboration will make uncovering illicit land ownership a simple process. But those foreigners who have sought experienced legal advice for their property purchases should have no concerns for their own Thai companies.