Nominees in Thailand: the LAND ACTION crackdown and the risks

On 19 October 2026, Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul launched ‘LAND ACTION’, an operation meant to conclude by December the high-risk investigations into land held by nominees on behalf of foreigners. According to the government press release of 19 October, the tally covers 1,397 cases of established or suspected nominee holding, involving 2,360 plots valued at about THB 14.01 billion (£314.5 million); irregular cases are to go through disposal procedures and further legal action. On the same day, he stressed that Thailand ‘remains open to honest and transparent foreign investment’. Thai landholding is being brought into the open: here is what is being examined, and which forms of ownership remain open, as a companion to our article on property ownership in Thailand. Texts checked on 1 November 2026; five points that the sources consulted do not settle are listed at the end of the article.

What does the figure of 36,277 companies really measure?

The figure comes from a meeting held on 4 September 2026 at the Ministry of Commerce. The Department of Lands passed to the Department of Business Development (DBD) the list of legal entities that hold land or a condominium unit; those on the DBD register were matched against its shareholding data. Of the 123,542 companies holding titled land, 36,277 have at least one foreign shareholder.

These companies are neither ‘suspected’ nor ‘prosecuted’: they were identified by data matching. The DBD’s director general at the time, Poonpong Naiyanapakorn, said so himself: not all of them can be described as nominees, since some are genuine joint ventures between Thais and foreigners. The Nation refers to figures used for screening, not findings of wrongdoing.

The screening of 4 September 2026, from the land register to companies with foreign shareholders:

In 86.88% of these 36,277 companies, the foreign share ranges from 0.01% to 49%. Measured against the country’s total area as cited by the DBD, the rai they hold represent 0.33% of the territory, by our calculation. And the map is not that of the beach resorts: by number of plots, Bangkok, Chonburi and Samut Prakan lead for companies with a minority foreign stake, and Chonburi and Rayong, in the EEC industrial corridor, for wholly foreign companies. Phuket, Surat Thani and Prachuap Khiri Khan appear in none of these rankings.

Which forms of ownership remain open, and which documents are examined?

The measures described by the 2026 sources concern landholding by companies with foreign shareholders, by Thai buyers or companies above certain amounts, and by the Thai spouse of a foreigner. The government press release of 19 October distinguishes lawful holdings from irregular ones, and looks at the effective control and beneficiaries of a company beyond what its register shows. Three forms of ownership come under texts that have not changed; being lawful does not exempt them from checks.

A condominium unit under the foreign quota. Section 19 of the Condominium Act B.E. 2522 lists the categories of foreigners who may own a unit in their own name, among them a foreigner who brings foreign currency into the country (section 19(5)), provided the floor area held by foreigners stays within 49% of that of the units (section 19 bis). For this category, section 19 ter(5) requires evidence that the currency was brought in, or of the account withdrawals it lists, for at least the amount of the price; each category has its own documents. Among the 2026 measures, we found none aimed at a foreign co-owner registered within the quota. The 76,840 units held by companies with foreign participation are a separate matter, which The Nation (22 June 2026) describes as a loophole under examination.

The registered lease. The Civil and Commercial Code limits a lease of immovable property to 30 years, renewable (section 540), and makes enforcement in court of the agreed term beyond three years conditional on a written lease and registration with the competent official (section 538). Reports of the May 2026 instructions mention two leases under examination: one granted by a Thai buyer to their foreign spouse, and a long lease granted to a foreign legal entity.

The genuinely Thai-majority company. Under the Land Code (section 97), a company is not foreign if foreigners hold 49% of the capital or less and make up no more than half of the shareholders by number. What the 2026 texts examine is whether the Thai contributions are real and who effectively controls the company.

Our survey of 20 October 2026, presented in our guide to ownership and price, maps the supply. In Bangkok, 43.8% of the 34,891 condominium units for sale are offered under the foreign quota, and 0.7% on a lease; in Phuket, 63% under the foreign quota and 12.9% on a lease. For villas, the proportion is reversed: of 14,467 villas for sale in six destinations, 80% are offered on a lease, including 81.6% in Phuket.

What has changed at the Land Office counter since May 2026

On 11 May 2026, the Department of Lands issued guidelines, reported by Thansettakij. Where a Thai might be holding for a foreigner, the official examines the source of funds and the relationship between the parties; the Thai spouse of a foreigner confirms that the funds are their personal property; for a company, the examination covers the shareholding, actual income, the source of capital and the use of the land. Legal entities with foreign shareholders are then subject to quarterly checks.

According to The Nation (26 May 2026), a company that buys beyond its registered capital without a mortgage will have the credibility of that capital examined. The DBD has meanwhile tightened entry to its register. According to Lawplus, Central Registrar Order No. 1/2569 has required since 1 April an investment confirmation letter when a foreigner becomes an authorised signatory of a company run by Thais, in which the director confirms that the capital has actually been paid in and that no Thai is acting as a nominee; according to TCIJ, Order No. 2/2026 has required since 1 August three months of bank statements, from both the Thai contributor and the recipient.

The final piece is Ministry of Interior circular No. มท 0515.2/ว 19097 of 25 August 2026, described by Tilleke & Gibbins and by Formichella & Sritawat. According to these two firms, it opens the provincial investigation committees to police investigators, asks Land Offices for proactive screening and sets up a twin track: if the company is ‘foreign’ within the meaning of the Land Code, the governor sets a deadline for disposal; if it was set up to hold on behalf of a foreigner, a criminal complaint is filed. Formichella & Sritawat point out that it creates no new legal power.

What do the texts provide against nominee arrangements?

Two laws intersect, with two definitions. The Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (FBA) treats as foreign a company at least half of whose shares are held by foreigners (section 4); the Land Code uses more than 49% of the capital or a majority of foreign shareholders by number. Each targets nominee arrangements within its own scope. Section 36 of the FBA targets, among other things, holding shares as a nominee to enable a foreigner to run a business in circumvention or breach of the FBA, as well as the foreigner who agrees to the arrangement; it provides for up to three years’ imprisonment, a fine of THB 100,000 to 1,000,000, or both. Nominee landholding comes in parallel under the Land Code, section 113 of which punishes anyone who acquires land as an agent for a foreigner.

Penalties under the texts in force at 1 November 2026:

The courts look at the payment more than the form. In judgment No. 2690/2538 of 1995, reported by the law firm ThaiLawOnline, the Supreme Court held that the purchase of land paid for by a foreigner and registered in a Thai’s name was contrary to the Land Code; the foreigner, as an undisclosed principal, had no claim against the third party who had bought it back in good faith.

What the operations on the ground show

On 11 May 2026, the DSI and the DBD agreed their cooperation against foreign businesses concealed in tourist areas: 11,426 companies ranked by level of risk, with priority given to Koh Samui and Koh Phangan, followed by an extension to other tourist destinations. The phases followed one another in Phuket, Krabi and Phang Nga on 20 June, in Hua Hin on 10 August and on Koh Samui on 15 August. According to MGR Online, the cumulative total for the first six phases then stood at 238 companies, 272 plots, about THB 2,839 million (£63.7 million) and 178 arrest warrants.

The categories must not be confused: a company under examination is not a suspect, and a suspect is not a convicted offender. Thairath reports 20 cases ending in a conviction over the first five phases; The Phuket News, the only source to report it, says 14 defendants were each sentenced on Koh Phangan to one year and three months’ imprisonment and a fine of THB 15,000 (£340). In Phuket, the Department of Lands examined 6,621 companies and classed 317 of them as foreign within the meaning of the Land Code, covering 486 plots with a bare-land value of THB 1,887 million (£42.4 million), according to Thansettakij (10 July).

One figure from Koh Samui concerns French nationals first of all, but it is telling for any foreign buyer on the island. According to The Nation (22 June 2026), which cites the DBD, the island has 8,213 companies with foreign shareholders, and the French form the largest group, with about 24%; the newspaper, the only one to publish this share, makes clear that these figures do not mean the companies are illegal. Two French nationals were among those arrested on 20 June, and another on 15 August; according to MGR Online, one strand of the Samui operation began with a report from the French embassy. Our article on buying a villa on Koh Samui should now be read in this context.

What does the December 2026 deadline change?

It concerns the investigations, not the owners. The plan of 19 October, reported by Thansettakij and The Nation, rests on three pillars: conclude the high-risk cases by December; force the sale of land held unlawfully, vetting the buyers so that one nominee does not succeed another; and prevent, by monitoring changes of shareholder. The stated doctrine: ‘set aside the name, judge the conduct’.

December is not a date for regularisation. In the sources consulted, we found no amnesty window opened in 2025 or 2026; the disposal period cited here, under section 94, is set case by case, between 180 days and one year.

What separates a documented purchase from an average one?

A title deed read before the listing. The listing states a regime; the title deed and the deed of sale say who holds the property. A unit under the quota is supported by the documents that section 19 ter requires according to the buyer’s category, described in our article on reselling a condo; land held by a company is read together with its shareholding, its capital and the source of its funds.

Advice that does not depend on the seller. In Hua Hin, according to Thairath, the foreign suspects stated that lawyers and accountants had advised them to use these companies, and the Thai shareholders said they had never paid for their shares. In June, the DBD identified 140 accountants who were shareholders in more than 2,040 joint ventures.

A regime chosen with full knowledge. The quota, the registered lease and a genuinely Thai company fall under separate texts, each with its own documents. The villa supply is mainly leasehold, the condominium supply mainly under the foreign quota: the regime is read together with the property, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, as in our article on Phuket’s neighbourhoods.

Simon and Claire’s case: a villa or a condo in Phuket

Five points the sources consulted do not settle

• How the 19 October 2026 tally breaks down. The government press release publishes a national tally; we found no breakdown by province in it, and the total cannot be transposed to any one destination.
• The scope of the circular of 25 August 2026. Tilleke & Gibbins stresses proactive screening, Formichella & Sritawat the absence of any new legal power; its text has not been found online.
• The draft reform of the Land Code. Its status before the Cabinet after July 2026 is not confirmed.
• The national criminal record. The published cumulative totals cover different scopes and cannot be added together; we found no consolidated official series.
• Recent case law. Only the 1995 judgment is sourced, by a law firm; we found no judgment from 2025 or 2026 on a nominee landholding company.

The absence of a source in this list is not the absence of a rule: these points need checking file by file.

How our database places a property within its market

Our surveys show, for each property for sale, the regime stated in the listing. In Phuket, in the 141 buildings that sell under both regimes, a leasehold unit is listed 7.3% cheaper; in the 75 estates that sell both, a leasehold villa is listed 0.6% higher than a freehold one. These are asking prices, and the stated regime does not say who holds the villa. To place a property within its neighbourhood, put it on the map.

What you can do now

Before committing to a property offered through a company, ask in writing for its articles of association, its list of shareholders and its capital, and hand them to a Thai lawyer you choose yourself. For a condominium unit, ask for the title deed and the quota letter, together with the supporting documents that section 19 ter requires for the category under which the purchase is made.