Thailand 99-Year Leasehold Proposal: Sap Ing Sith

Thailand’s proposed 99-year leasehold has attracted considerable attention among foreign property buyers, developers and real estate agents. It is often presented as if foreigners may soon lease Thai land for 99 years. The actual proposal was more complex: it concerned an amendment to the Sap Ing Sith Act, not an extension of an ordinary property lease under the Civil and Commercial Code.

The proposal contained an unusual state-ownership structure. Privately owned property could potentially qualify for the longer term only after ownership had been transferred to a government agency. When the right ended, the property would remain with the Thai state.

First published: September 2026 • Legal status reviewed: 6 September 2026

government could revive or revise the proposal.

Is There a 99-Year Leasehold in Thailand?

No. As of September 2026, Thailand has not introduced a generally available 99-year leasehold for foreigners buying a house, villa, condominium or other residential property. An ordinary lease of immovable property remains subject to Section 540 of the Civil and Commercial Code. The maximum term is 30 years. A lease may be renewed, but an option or promise to renew does not create a presently registered 60- or 90-year lease. The existing Sap Ing Sith Act also limits Sap Ing Sith to 30 years. The proposed increase to 99 years appeared in a draft amendment published for consultation in 2025, but that draft has not completed the legislative process.

“Leasehold” or Sap Ing Sith?

The expression “99-year leasehold” is widely used by property agents because it is easily understood by foreign buyers. Legally, however, the proposal concerned Sap Ing Sith (ทรัพย์อิงสิทธิ), sometimes translated as a “right over leasehold asset” or “right to use immovable property”.

Sap Ing Sith was introduced by the Sap Ing Sith Act B.E. 2562 (2019). It is a separately registered right connected with immovable property and should not be confused with a normal lease under the Civil and Commercial Code.

Legal arrangement	Current maximum	Basic legal character
Ordinary property lease	30 years	Primarily a contractual lease right governed by Sections 537–571 of the Civil and Commercial Code
Sap Ing Sith	30 years	A separately registered statutory right which may be transferred, inherited and used as security during its term
Proposed state-backed Sap Ing Sith	Up to 99 years	A proposed right over property owned by a government agency; not currently available under the draft proposal

For more information about the ordinary 30-year rule, renewal options and the position of subsequent owners, see Leasehold and Lease Renewal in Thailand.

Background of the 99-Year Leasehold Proposal

The proposal developed in several stages.

Government study in 2024

In 2024, the Thai government instructed the Ministry of Interior to study whether the maximum duration of Sap Ing Sith should be increased from 30 to 99 years. It was discussed together with a separate proposal to increase the permitted foreign ownership ratio in condominium buildings from 49% to 75%.

The government clarified at that time that a 99-year right had not yet been approved. The relevant authorities had only been instructed to study the proposal and the laws that would have to be amended.

Department of Lands draft in 2025

In August 2025, the proposal moved beyond general policy discussion. The Department of Lands prepared an eleven-section draft amendment to the Sap Ing Sith Act and published it through Thailand’s official legal consultation system.

The public consultation ran from 22 August to 5 September 2025. This was a genuine preliminary legislative step, but public consultation did not itself make the proposal law.

What Did the Draft Actually Propose?

The draft would have allowed a government agency to establish Sap Ing Sith over property owned by that agency for a term not exceeding 99 years.

For this purpose, “government agency” was broadly defined to include:

government departments;
state enterprises;
local administrative organisations; and
other government bodies designated by Ministerial Regulation.

The proposal could apply to land, land with buildings, condominium units and certain other government-owned immovable property for which the government agency had evidence of ownership.

It could also allow Sap Ing Sith to be established over an appropriate part of government land or a government building, rather than necessarily over the entire property. Special rules would apply to condominium units.

How Could Privately Owned Land Qualify?

The most remarkable part of the proposal concerned privately owned property.

Under proposed Section 4/2, a private owner seeking a Sap Ing Sith term longer than the ordinary statutory period would first have to transfer ownership of the property to a government agency. The government agency could then establish the longer Sap Ing Sith under the proposed new Section 4/1.

The private Thai owner or Thai company transfers ownership to a government agency.
The government agency becomes the legal owner of the property.
The agency establishes and registers Sap Ing Sith for a term of up to 99 years.
The holder receives the registered right to use and deal with the property within the scope of Sap Ing Sith.
When Sap Ing Sith ends, the property remains with or becomes property of the state.

The draft did not describe the government as a trustee, nominee or temporary custodian. It contemplated an actual transfer of ownership.

What Could the Proposal Mean for Foreign Buyers?

The draft clearly contemplated that foreigners could be Sap Ing Sith holders. It included a proposed provision preventing foreign holders from using the property for agricultural purposes as defined under Thai agricultural land lease legislation.

The presence of this restriction indicates that foreign investors were expected to be among the potential holders. It did not, however, mean that every foreigner would automatically be entitled to a 99-year right.

A final law or subsequent Ministerial Regulations could still have imposed conditions concerning:

minimum investment;
permitted locations or designated zones;
maximum land area;
residential or commercial use;
government approval;
registration charges or annual payments;
transfer and mortgage conditions; and
restrictions on resale or speculation.

None of these matters was fully established because the proposal did not reach the stage of a final Act and implementing regulations.

Could a 99-Year Sap Ing Sith Replace Nominee Companies?

Potentially, yes. This is one of the most interesting possible applications of the proposal, even though the draft did not expressly create a nominee-company regularisation programme.

Foreigners are generally prohibited from owning Thai land. Some foreign investors have instead used Thai companies with Thai nominee shareholders to acquire land for houses, villas, resorts and other developments. Where the Thai shareholders are acting only on behalf of a foreigner and are not genuine investors, the structure may breach Thai land and foreign business legislation.

A state-backed 99-year Sap Ing Sith could offer a more transparent alternative:

the land would no longer be held through Thai nominee shareholders;
the foreign investor and the source of the investment would be visible;
the foreigner’s rights could be officially registered;
the government could control the permitted use and size of the property;
fees, taxes and other payments could be collected; and
the underlying land would remain in Thai state ownership.

For a foreign investor, a secure 99-year registered right could be commercially more attractive than indirect control through a legally vulnerable Thai company. For the government, it could bring foreign-funded property holdings into a regulated system without permitting direct foreign ownership of land.

This potential solution is an inference from the structure of the draft and the wider policy debate. The draft itself did not state that all existing nominee companies would be allowed to convert their landholdings.

Could an Existing Nominee Company Convert?

Not under any procedure currently available. The draft did not contain the transitional provisions that would be necessary for a comprehensive regularisation programme.

It did not provide:

an amnesty for earlier nominee ownership;
immunity from criminal or administrative proceedings;
an automatic right to transfer land to a government agency;
protection against an existing compulsory disposal order;
special procedures for property subject to a mortgage;
tax or Land Office fee exemptions;
rules for distributing the transfer proceeds to shareholders; or
protection for directors, Thai shareholders or professional advisers involved in the earlier structure.

A transfer to the state would therefore not automatically erase an earlier violation. A genuine conversion scheme would need express rules dealing with past conduct, taxes, creditors, mortgages, company approvals and the conditions under which voluntary disclosure would be accepted.

Unanswered financial questions

The draft stated that compensation, expenses and administrative procedures would be prescribed by Ministerial Regulation. It did not yet explain:

whether the state would pay market value for the property;
whether the transfer value would be exchanged for the 99-year right;
whether the holder would pay an additional premium or annual charge;
who would pay transfer fees, withholding tax and Specific Business Tax;
how buildings and improvements would be valued; or
which government agency would administer large numbers of individual properties.

These matters would determine whether the structure was commercially attractive in practice.

Was It a Serious Proposal, and Is It Still Active?

The proposal was more than a casual political announcement. The Department of Lands prepared detailed statutory wording and opened a formal public consultation. It should therefore be regarded as a genuine legislative proposal.

However, it was still at a relatively early stage. It required further government consideration, legal review, Cabinet approval, submission to Parliament, parliamentary approval, Royal Assent and publication in the Royal Gazette.

The consultation ended in September 2025 at approximately the same time as a change of government. The proposal did not subsequently complete the legislative process. No amendment creating a generally available 99-year Sap Ing Sith has been published in the Royal Gazette.

As of September 2026, the most accurate description is therefore:

The 99-year Sap Ing Sith was a serious but currently inactive or dormant proposal. It is not existing Thai leasehold law.

The concept could be revived in the future. Thailand continues to face the competing policy goals of attracting foreign investment, preventing nominee landholding and retaining Thai ownership of land. State ownership combined with a long-term registered right could provide a compromise, but any future draft may differ substantially from the 2025 proposal.

Practical Warning for Foreign Property Buyers

Foreign buyers should be cautious when an agent, developer or seller refers to a “99-year leasehold”, “government-backed 99-year lease” or “coming 99-year law”.

Before relying on such a claim, ask:

Which enacted Thai law presently permits the 99-year term?
Which government agency will own the property?
Under which Land Office registration category will the right be registered?
Has the legislation been published in the Royal Gazette?
Does the property satisfy all eligibility and investment conditions?
What happens if the proposed law is never enacted?
Is the purchase price based on 30 years or on an assumed 99-year period?

A contractual promise to convert an existing lease into a 99-year right if the law changes does not guarantee that:

the law will change;
the final law will resemble the earlier draft;
the particular property will qualify;
a government agency will accept ownership;
the landowner will cooperate; or
the conversion will be financially viable.

Until a new law is enacted and operational, a buyer should value an ordinary leasehold transaction on the basis of the rights that can actually be registered today.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a foreigner currently obtain a 99-year residential lease in Thailand?

No. The ordinary maximum lease term remains 30 years. A renewal promise does not turn the transaction into a registered 60- or 90-year lease.

Is Sap Ing Sith another name for leasehold?

It is frequently described as leasehold in English-language property marketing, but technically it is a separate registered statutory right under the Sap Ing Sith Act.

Does Sap Ing Sith allow direct foreign ownership of land?

No. The holder receives rights to use and deal with the property during the registered period but does not acquire ownership of the underlying land.

Would the proposed 99-year right apply to all privately owned land?

No. Under the 2025 draft, privately owned property could enter the longer-term structure only after ownership was transferred to a government agency.

Would the Thai owner recover the land after 99 years?

Not under the proposed structure. The draft stated that the property would ultimately belong to the state after the Sap Ing Sith ended.

Was the proposal specifically an amnesty for nominee companies?

No. It could potentially provide a lawful alternative or future conversion model, but the draft contained no amnesty or automatic regularisation procedure.

Can a nominee company voluntarily convert its land into a 99-year Sap Ing Sith today?

No. No such conversion procedure is currently in force. Transferring the land would also not automatically remove liability for earlier unlawful nominee ownership.

Are longer leases ever available under other Thai laws?

Certain special commercial, industrial or investment laws may allow longer rights for qualifying projects in designated circumstances. These exceptional regimes do not provide a generally available 99-year residential leasehold for foreign villa or house buyers.

Should a buyer pay more because a 99-year law may be introduced?

No. A proposed or expected change in the law should not be valued as an existing registered property right.

Official Sources and Further Reading

This article explains a legislative proposal and the law in force as of September 2026. A proposal, public consultation or government study does not create a registrable property right. The legal position should be checked again before entering into a property transaction.