In August 2026, Thailand's Ministry of Interior issued Circular No. MorTor 0515.2/Wor 19097, significantly extending the investigative reach of provincial inquiry committees. Those committees now have direct access to shareholder records, tax filings, and immigration data for companies with foreign involvement. According to Al Jazeera's August 2026 reporting, AI-assisted audits have already screened 50,000 entities nationwide. For any foreign buyer considering a villa purchase in Phuket or Koh Samui through a Thai company structure, this development makes a thorough revision of standard due diligence practice non-negotiable.
On Koh Samui and Koh Phangan alone, roughly 70% of 16,800 registered entities have identifiable foreign connections, per data cited by Al Jazeera. In Phuket province and Surat Thani, land seizures and criminal referrals have already occurred. According to Mondaq (28 August 2026), the new circular establishes a two-track enforcement path: forced disposal of land by the company, or criminal proceedings where a structure was deliberately created to circumvent ownership restrictions.
We monitor these regulatory shifts in real time. This analysis sets out a concrete due diligence framework that allows buyers to distinguish a legally compliant corporate structure from a nominee arrangement.
Quick answer
- The 25 August 2026 circular directs Land Offices to proactively flag companies against nominee risk indicators, moving beyond reactive complaint-based enforcement
- Provincial inquiry committees now hold cross-referencing access to tax, immigration, and banking data for Thai shareholders
- 28 suspected foreign nationals have already been referred to prosecutors for company-registration fraud (Al Jazeera, August 2026)
- On Koh Samui and Koh Phangan, 70% of 16,800 registered companies show foreign links - though the foreign connection alone does not confirm a legal violation
- The principal risk for foreign buyers: loss of land without compensation if a company is ruled a nominee arrangement under Section 96 bis of the Land Code
- A compliant structure requires documented, genuine capital contribution and operational involvement from Thai shareholders
Options and scenarios
Scenario A: buying a villa through a company with a genuine Thai business partner
A foreign buyer holds up to 49% of shares in a Thai Limited Company where Thai co-shareholders collectively hold at least 51%. The critical requirement: those Thai shareholders must demonstrate verifiable sources of capital for their share subscriptions. Based on our market analysis, the cost of establishing such a structure - including company registration, legal opinion, and shareholder verification - runs approximately 120,000 to 250,000 THB. This is the only scenario we currently consider low-risk for assets valued above 10 million THB.
Scenario B: acquiring shares in an existing company on the secondary market
The buyer purchases shares in a company that already holds a villa with a Chanote title. In 2026, this is the highest-risk route. Inquiry committees are reviewing shareholder histories retrospectively. If previous Thai shareholders were nominees - no capital payments, no tax declarations consistent with their shareholdings - the incoming buyer inherits that legal exposure. In our analysis of secondary-market listings across Kamala and Surin in 2026, roughly one in five villa offers in the 15-30 million THB range involves a company carrying at least one nominee warning indicator.
Scenario C: leasehold instead of freehold through a company
This route sidesteps nominee risk entirely. A foreign buyer registers a 30-year lease (leasehold) over the villa directly in their own name or through a company. The land remains in Thai ownership. Based on our estimates, leasehold villa pricing in the Layan and Bang Tao areas runs 15-25% below equivalent freehold prices. The trade-off is limited resale upside and no legal certainty on lease renewal until a new term is formally registered at the Land Office.
Comparison table
| Parameter | New company with verified Thai partner | Existing secondary-market company | Personal leasehold |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal form | Thai Ltd. (new registration) | Thai Ltd. (share transfer) | 30-year registered lease |
| Structure cost | 120,000-250,000 THB | 80,000-150,000 THB + due diligence | 30,000-60,000 THB |
| Nominee risk in 2026 | Low (with documented capital) | High (shareholder history exposure) | None (foreigner holds no land title) |
| Operational control | Full (company director) | Full, but burdened by historical record | Limited (subject to lease terms) |
| Land seizure possible | Yes, if structure is challenged | Yes, elevated probability | Not applicable |
| Resale path | Share transfer or land sale | Share transfer (complicated in 2026) | Lease transfer (requires landowner consent) |
| Legal horizon | Indefinite (freehold) | Indefinite, but legally exposed | 30 years (renewal uncertain) |
Risks and mistakes
Case 1: villa in Kamala at 22 million THB, company with five Thai shareholders
A buyer from Central Europe acquired shares in a company holding a villa in the Kamala area in 2024. The transaction price was 22 million THB. The company listed five Thai shareholders, none of whom had filed annual tax returns reflecting income proportionate to their declared shareholdings. The combined declared capital of the Thai shareholders was 250,000 THB, while the land value exceeded 12 million THB.
The error made: no verification of Thai shareholders' capital sources before completing the share transfer. The buyer relied on an intermediary's assurance that the 'structure was standard practice.'
Warning signals that were identifiable in advance:
- Five Thai shareholders with no documented business relationship to each other
- Registered share capital disproportionately low relative to the asset value
- No minutes from shareholder meetings reflecting actual votes or resolutions
- Thai shareholders appearing simultaneously in more than a dozen other companies in the DBD register
Financial cost of the error: if the company is ruled a nominee arrangement under the August 2026 circular, the land is subject to forced disposal within a committee-set deadline (per Mondaq, August 2026). Based on our estimates, a forced sale under those conditions generates a loss of 30-50% of market value, given time pressure and the legal encumbrance on the asset.
What we would do differently: prior to the share transfer, we would commission an independent lawyer to review each Thai shareholder's personal tax declarations (PND 90/91) for the preceding three years, cross-check the DBD register for multiple simultaneous company memberships, and obtain bank transfer records confirming actual capital payments into the company.
Case 2: villa in Bophut at 18 million THB with promised infrastructure
A buyer acquired a villa on Koh Samui in the Bophut area for 18 million THB through a newly registered company. The ownership structure was formally sound: two Thai shareholders with documented capital contributions. The problem lay elsewhere. The developer committed to completing a access road and sewage connection within 12 months. Two years later, neither existed.
The error made: infrastructure commitments were not written into the sale and purchase agreement, and no building permit for the road was verified with the local administrative authority (OrBorTor).
Financial cost of the error: self-funding the access road and utility connections cost 2.8 million THB, pushing the total investment 15.5% above the original budget.
Nominee red flags - measurable criteria
In our analysis work, we apply the following risk indicators:
- Thai shareholders holding positions in more than three companies simultaneously in the DBD register
- Registered share capital below 20% of the market value of the land held
- Missing audited financial statements for any financial year
- Thai shareholders with no bank transfer records confirming capital subscription payments
- Powers of attorney granting a foreigner authority over all operational decisions without restriction
- The company's registered address identical to the villa that constitutes its sole asset
FAQ
Does any company with both Thai and foreign shareholders automatically qualify as a nominee structure?
No. Foreign shareholding up to 49% does not constitute a legal violation. The decisive question is whether Thai shareholders have genuine capital involvement and operational participation. The August 2026 circular requires Land Offices to verify those elements, but foreign involvement alone does not determine nominee status.
What documents should we verify before acquiring shares in a Thai company holding a villa?
The minimum checklist includes: a current DBD company extract, the shareholder register (Bor Or Jor 5), the company's corporate tax returns (PND 50), Thai shareholders' personal tax declarations (PND 90/91), shareholder meeting minutes, bank transfer records evidencing share capital payments, and the Chanote title with an encumbrance check at the Land Office.
What does comprehensive due diligence cost for a villa-holding company in Phuket?
Based on our 2026 market estimates, full legal and financial due diligence for a company holding a villa in the 10-30 million THB range costs approximately 80,000 to 200,000 THB. That covers a legal opinion, DBD register review, title verification, and shareholder history analysis.
What happens to the villa if the company is found to be a nominee arrangement?
Under the August 2026 circular (per Mondaq), two enforcement tracks apply: the company may be ordered to dispose of the land within a committee-set deadline, or criminal proceedings may be initiated against those involved in creating the nominee structure. In practice, this means a forced below-market sale or asset forfeiture.
Is leasehold a safer route for foreign buyers in 2026?
Leasehold eliminates nominee risk because the foreigner does not acquire land ownership. A 30-year lease registered at the Land Office provides legal protection for its duration. The limitations are the absence of renewal certainty after 30 years and a lower resale value compared with freehold.
How are the new regulations affecting the Koh Samui villa market?
With 70% of 16,800 registered companies on Koh Samui showing foreign links, tightened enforcement is increasing buyer caution and extending transaction timelines. Based on our on-the-ground monitoring, closing times for villa purchases through companies in the Bophut and Maenam areas have extended by 30-60 days compared with the first half of 2026.
Which areas of Phuket face the highest nominee scrutiny?
Land seizures and criminal referrals have already occurred in Phuket province. In our assessment, the districts with the highest concentration of foreign-linked company-owned villas are Layan, Bang Tao, Surin, and Kamala. Land Offices in those districts are statistically handling the largest case volumes.
Are there cross-border tax obligations for foreign buyers holding shares in a Thai company?
Yes. Depending on the buyer's country of tax residence, holdings in a foreign company and any income derived from it may need to be declared locally. Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) rules, which many jurisdictions tightened from 2024 onward, may apply where the Thai company's income is predominantly passive - for example, rental income from the villa. We recommend consulting a tax adviser in the buyer's home jurisdiction before structuring any acquisition.
Researching property in Phuket or Koh Samui? Get in touch - our analysts will prepare a data brief for your shortlisted location.