Land purchase

Can foreigners own lands in the PH?
-@robertjjpaquet

No.

NO.

Now ask the question: Can Filipinos own land in the USA? If yes, (which is the correct answer), why are we so stupid as to not reciprocate on them? Fair is fair.

Now ask the question: Can Filipinos own land in the USA? If yes, (which is the correct answer), why are we so stupid as to not reciprocate on them? Fair is fair.
-@danfinn

Oh Dan, you know the answer to that one....

As do you srvonn.

dan already said no. As I will, NO, a foreigner can't own land here in PH. But as Dan simply states? Filipinos can own land in many countries and as I and others agree it should be reciprocal for equality and investment, trouble is the big 12 here need to have control.

OMO.

Cheers, Steve.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.

I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.

You know, you CAN apply for citizenship here. Then, you could vote, own land, etc., etc.

Now ask the question: Can Filipinos own land in the USA? If yes, (which is the correct answer), why are we so stupid as to not reciprocate on them? Fair is fair.
-@danfinn

Oh Dan, you know the answer to that one....
-@srvonn

Philipino's can own land in the USA, can own land in the UK, can own land in Australia etc etc, it seems thar Philippines is the only country that prohibits foreigners from owning land in their country.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.
I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.
-@srvonn

I would also be glad if my country kept, at bay, foreigners buying USA land when they come from countries where my countrymen cannot buy their land. Starbucks is irrelevant. Fair enough?

Agree Dan it should be reciprocal

.

Cheers, Steve.

Reciprocity works or should work on a bi lateral stage. I as an Aussie like you as a US citizen, many other countries can simply rock up here and stay for 3 years on a visitor visa, A Filipino wanting that in the US or Australia? Not going to happen.

Perhaps opening borders from others may change the Philippines governments thinking on property ownership and investment instead of the 10/12 heads trying to run this country, feeling threatened.

OMO.

Cheers, Steve.

Reciprocity works or should work on a bi lateral stage. I as an Aussie like you as a US citizen, many other countries can simply rock up here and stay for 3 years on a visitor visa, A Filipino wanting that in the US or Australia? Not going to happen.
Perhaps opening borders from others may change the Philippines governments thinking on property ownership and investment instead of the 10/12 heads trying to run this country, feeling threatened.

OMO.

Cheers, Steve.
-@bigpearl

Agree 100%. Visa policies should also be reciprocal. The US makes it difficult for Filipinos to obtain visitor visas but the Philippines issues a visa stamp on arrival at the airport. To be reciprocal, the US should do the same, visa on arrival but authorities are concerned about overstay. So then the Philippines says that US tourists must apply for interviews at the Phils embassy and get a visa. In my opinion, that is fine; many countries do that. Here, either the Phils gives in due to lack of tourism income or the US gives in due to pressure fron travelers to the Philippines. Since the latter is not probable, then we end up where we started. I personally think that eventually it is best to get a long term visa which involves a lot more than the a US tourist visa. And the process should be reciprocal for both countries.

Agree but the topic is about land purchase which will not happen for us foreigners but perhaps one day, don't we call that protectionism or simply control?

Land purchases aside I'm very happy that the PH government lets me stay here for 3 year stints, trade off.

Cheers, Steve.

danfinn said . . . . . Agree 100%. Visa policies should also be reciprocal. The US makes it difficult for Filipinos to obtain visitor visas but the Philippines issues a visa stamp on arrival at the airport.

<<To be reciprocal, the US should do the same, visa on arrival but authorities are concerned about overstay.>>

*******************************************

Exactly

Most third world citizens want to come to the US for opportunities. If the US had reciprocal agreements with those countries, thousands would overstay their visas and not by accident. There is approximately 20 million illegals in the US.

Now for all practical reasons Filipinos are peaceful people, but illegals are hard to deport under the current administration. Under current conditions illegals are welcomed and provided with more services than millions of American citizens receive.  Watch the news, illegals are staying in NY City hotel rooms that cost $300 a night gratis plus related services.

How many Americans can afford $300 a night indefinitely?

For a third world citizens, they have to provide a reason to be here and they must they have assets in their own country to insure they will not overstay their visa and return home.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.
I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.
-@srvonn
I would also be glad if my country kept, at bay, foreigners buying USA land when they come from countries where my countrymen cannot buy their land. Starbucks is irrelevant. Fair enough?
-@danfinn

No, not fair enough. My Starbucks comment concerns greedy corporations and the common rich elites who go around buying everything up and ruining for everyone else. All they care about is making a buck or ruling others.

You and others are complaining about

reciprocity because you personally feel shafted. I understand.  I have felt the same way at times. But think of this warm green paradise called the Philippines, and realize what a trash dump it would be now if Americans were allowed to move in for the last 50 years. Been to any major city in the US lately. Take a quick trip to Seattle. Then try not to throw up when you get off the plane.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.
I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.
-@srvonn
I would also be glad if my country kept, at bay, foreigners buying USA land when they come from countries where my countrymen cannot buy their land. Starbucks is irrelevant. Fair enough?
-@danfinn
No, not fair enough. My Starbucks comment concerns greedy corporations and the common rich elites who go around buying everything up and ruining for everyone else. All they care about is making a buck or ruling others.

You and others are complaining about
reciprocity because you personally feel shafted.

Improve your reading comprehension skills. Nobody is complaining about reciprocity, we are advocating it.

I understand. I have felt the same way at times. But think of this warm green paradise

And the US is not a paradise in many places, grossly exceeding the Philippines? I didn't come here looking for a warm green anything, paradise included.   

And fine, that is your impression of the US. In that case there should be no reason that foreigners would want to waste their money buying American land. I am OK with that. Please, don't buy, it will lower the price for struggling young American couples.  Why does reciprocity bother you so much? That principle should apply to all matters of human rights, land purchase, trade, immigration etc. but Westerners are often given the short end because we are stupid and allow it to happen. I think treating each other fairly should be a given. I know many Filipinos who moved to the USA and purchased houses and lots so why should this American not be able to do the same here? Your Starbucks example is irrelevant because tbey are generally on leased land even in the US so you might want to drop that one as irrelevant lol.

danfinn & srvonn . . .Land Ownership

POLITICAL REASONS: Governments do not want foreigners to own land because they are worried about national security and economic stability.

ECONOMIC REASONS: Countries want to protect its own citizens from foreign competition . This is often the case in countries that have a strong agriculture sector.

CULTURAL REASONS: People in some countries do not foreigners to own land because those countries have a strong sense of national identity.

So both of you are right and wrong, one size does not fit all.

Protectionism rings a bell for the oligarchy and control over the minions.

It's surprising that I can come here and pay my dues, leave @ 35/6 months and start again, Many foreign nationals can purchase property in many countries including Australia and the US but we limit them to applying for a visa if from a third world country, My better half if Filipino and we jumped through all the hoops to gain permanent residency/visa and once gained he can buy land/houses etc.

There is no parity nor reciprocity between my country and the Philippines when it comes to visas and land ownership, why? Because those at the top hold control and want to own and keep it all, not some foreigner, the threat from the thinkers. Those willing to advance a country instead of subjugating the populous.

Given the relationship between Oz and PH There are huge differences in visas and land ownership laws, happy to be a retired bum on a visitor visa.

Cheers, Steve.

danfinn & srvonn . . .Land Ownership
POLITICAL REASONS: Governments do not want foreigners to own land because they are worried about national security and economic stability.

ECONOMIC REASONS: Countries want to protect its own citizens from foreign competition . This is often the case in countries that have a strong agriculture sector.

CULTURAL REASONS: People in some countries do not foreigners to own land because those countries have a strong sense of national identity.

So both of you are right and wrong, one size does not fit all.
-@Enzyte Bob

But right and wrong is not the issue. I am not saying the Phils govt is wrong to deny us land ownership and the same applies to China, Malaysia and any other country with such laws. All I am saying is, if they have such laws, then the USA response should be the same regarding that country's citizens. I see nothing wrong with that; it is fair. No hard feelings on either side.

Agree Dan.

The Aussie government in the last few years has put its foot down with the Chinese trying to buy large tracts of land (cattle and sheep stations and some a million hectares and larger)

They still buy smaller properties and investments with little to be done about it, can I buy a rice farm in China?

Put the brakes on and limit ownership.

OMO.

Cheers, Steve.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.
I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.
-@srvonn
I would also be glad if my country kept, at bay, foreigners buying USA land when they come from countries where my countrymen cannot buy their land. Starbucks is irrelevant. Fair enough?
-@danfinn
No, not fair enough. My Starbucks comment concerns greedy corporations and the common rich elites who go around buying everything up and ruining for everyone else. All they care about is making a buck or ruling others.

You and others are complaining about
reciprocity because you personally feel shafted.

Improve your reading comprehension skills. Nobody is complaining about reciprocity, we are advocating it.
Dan, did you forget to take your meds before posting? Of course you are advocating  it. It's the subject of reciprocity that you are complaining about. I am sorry I didn't spell it out and say (or the lack thereof) after the word reciprocity. I am sorry,  I thought you could figure that out.

I understand. I have felt the same way at times. But think of this warm green paradise
Even right here I say that I understand. Yet you are still raging about my post.
And the US is not a paradise in many places, grossly exceeding the Philippines? I didn't come here looking for a warm green anything, paradise

I don't really care why you came here Dan. I only said that you are whining about some government policies that you will never be able to change. Government policies such as the one that covers this thread. I told you above that I understand how you feel and I sometimes feel the same, but you want to go off on a tangent about the absurdity of this restriction in your presence.  Chill dude.

And fine, that is your impression of the US. In that case there should be no reason that foreigners would want to waste their money buying American land. I am OK with that. Please, don't buy, it will lower the price for struggling young American couples. Why does reciprocity bother you so much?

What the heck are you talking about now. I never said reciprocity bothered me. Oh, I get it. It's not meds, it alcohol isn't  it. Get a grip, Dan.

That principle should apply to all matters of human rights, land purchase, trade, immigration etc. but Westerners are often given the short end because we are stupid and allow it to happen. I think treating each other fairly should be a given. I know many Filipinos who moved to the USA and purchased houses and lots so why should this American not be able to do the same here? Your Starbucks example is irrelevant because tbey are generally on leased land even in the US so you might want to drop that one as irrelevant lol.
-@danfinn

I believe you have now become irrelevant. Your foresight is throttled down to your biased point of view, king-like as it is. I can see why there is so much arguing on these forums.

And as a newbie srvonn, read back for 10 years and get the gist, I'm not criticizing your view/s but and but Starbucks, Maccas etc. are all franchised no differenf to Inasal or chooks to go, I think Dan was using 7/11, doh I mean Starbucks as a metaphor and little else.

As for government policies? simply look at history no matter country, things, politicians and laws change with social pressure, simply look at slavery or gay rights, eventually most governments/churches bow to  public pressure and beliefs to stay in power. As for powerless? Slowly the wheels turn and I'm sure one day foreign nationals will be able to purchase property here, I might not be around but it will happen no different to the stupid annulment system and gay rights, come on 1st world countries wised up, a little slower in 3rd world countries.

OMO.

Cheers, Steve.

As a newbie to the culture and traditions I can only see so far. Buy I am glad the Philippines 🇵🇭 have kept the foreigners at bay. It seems a lot more relaxed without a Starbucks on every corner. I can still feel a kind of 70s culture as a backdrop. Something that would have disappeared long ago, if foreigners had come in and bought up all the land. I am not in favor of a ruling class (I thought there was only 9) when there are so many poor here. But I can see how somethings have helped.
I have gotten way off subject, so I will stop here. Sorry for the rambling.
-@srvonn
I would also be glad if my country kept, at bay, foreigners buying USA land when they come from countries where my countrymen cannot buy their land. Starbucks is irrelevant. Fair enough?
-@danfinn
No, not fair enough. My Starbucks comment concerns greedy corporations and the common rich elites who go around buying everything up and ruining for everyone else. All they care about is making a buck or ruling others.

You and others are complaining about
reciprocity because you personally feel shafted.

Improve your reading comprehension skills. Nobody is complaining about reciprocity, we are advocating it.
Dan, did you forget to take your meds before posting? Of course you are advocating it. It's the subject of reciprocity that you are complaining about. I am sorry I didn't spell it out and say (or the lack thereof) after the word reciprocity. I am sorry, I thought you could figure that out.
I understand. I have felt the same way at times. But think of this warm green paradise
Even right here I say that I understand. Yet you are still raging about my post.
And the US is not a paradise in many places, grossly exceeding the Philippines? I didn't come here looking for a warm green anything, paradise I don't really care why you came here Dan. I only said that you are whining about some government policies that you will never be able to change. Government policies such as the one that covers this thread. I told you above that I understand how you feel and I sometimes feel the same, but you want to go off on a tangent about the absurdity of this restriction in your presence. Chill dude.

And fine, that is your impression of the US. In that case there should be no reason that foreigners would want to waste their money buying American land. I am OK with that. Please, don't buy, it will lower the price for struggling young American couples. Why does reciprocity bother you so much?
What the heck are you talking about now. I never said reciprocity bothered me. Oh, I get it. It's not meds, it alcohol isn't it. Get a grip, Dan.

That principle should apply to all matters of human rights, land purchase, trade, immigration etc. but Westerners are often given the short end because we are stupid and allow it to happen. I think treating each other fairly should be a given. I know many Filipinos who moved to the USA and purchased houses and lots so why should this American not be able to do the same here? Your Starbucks example is irrelevant because tbey are generally on leased land even in the US so you might want to drop that one as irrelevant lol.
-@danfinnI believe you have now become irrelevant. Your foresight is throttled down to your biased point of view, king-like as it is. I can see why there is so much arguing on these forums.
-@srvonn

Wow, why don't you just write a book. I guess you have a lot to say on such a simple matter...and I suspect you never owned land anywhere...I don't care. Anyway I do not engage in debate with people who speak to me as you do so au revoir.

I’ve been told that the “no foreign ownership” was implemented after the Spanish & Catholic Church took possession/control of the prime lots. The Filipinos didn’t want to get moved to the back woods again, even with legal sales, so they made the law after independence from the USA.

As I said, it’s HERESAY, not factually checked out. But it makes sense…

I’ve been told that the “no foreign ownership” was implemented after the Spanish & Catholic Church took possession/control of the prime lots. The Filipinos didn’t want to get moved to the back woods again, even with legal sales, so they made the law after independence from the USA.
As I said, it’s HERESAY, not factually checked out. But it makes sense…
-@Skip Scott

My understanding is that US president Taft reversed that policy shortly after the Spanish were defeated and established the PI Commonwealth. Similar to you, this is not something I have double confirmed because I don't care that much.  After Commonwealth status ended, foreign land ownership was prohibited by the new Constitution, which we must respect. There is nothing preventing other countries like mine from enacting similar laws. And with the recent massive purchases of US farmland by certain foreigners in the US, it could happen sooner rather than later.

yep the US booted the Spanish out in 1898 or 9 and ruled here until from memory around the end of the 2nd world war when independence was established,  the lands act also from memory excluded any legal title/property owned by foreigners prior to that legislation, if you owned it and again from memory prior to 1935/9 you as a foreigner held the title, and after? You had to be a Filipino national to own land.

The really interesting thing is Squatters living on government land get relocated frequently to a new housing precinct/development  1 or 2 hours from their work because one of the big 4 wanted that land for development and I'm sure many brown paper bags involved.

I often wonder who runs a country, the duly elected government or the rich kids.

Again OMO.

Cheers, Steve.

yep the US booted the Spanish out in 1898 or 9 and ruled here until from memory around the end of the 2nd world war when independence was established, the lands act also from memory excluded any legal title/property owned by foreigners prior to that legislation, if you owned it and again from memory prior to 1935/9 you as a foreigner held the title, and after? You had to be a Filipino national to own land.
The really interesting thing is Squatters living on government land get relocated frequently to a new housing precinct/development 1 or 2 hours from their work because one of the big 4 wanted that land for development and I'm sure many brown paper bags involved.
I often wonder who runs a country, the duly elected government or the rich kids.

Again OMO.

Cheers, Steve.
-@bigpearl

As I understand it, when the US assumed control of the territory, the Vatican was the owner of most of the prime lands. US President Howard Taft sponsored legislation to take control of those lands and return them to the people. I believe that was taken as a very endearing act but I am not sure as to how the land was divided up after that.

Hello everyone,

Please note that I am closing this thread. We are far from the initial query, which is quite normal since the OP has provided too little infos and hasn't provided any feedback.

All the best

Bhavna

[Topic Closed]