SRRV -worth it or not?

[mogo51]

8 minutes ago, Tukaram (Tim) said:

I know you can buy a condo with the deposit money - unsure about long term lease. The PRA has people that help you get your SRRV. You do not pay them, the Dept of Tourism pays them. The expats i  have talked to that are on it say the folks are very helpful. They should be able to answer all your questions.

One of the big differences between the 13a and SRRV is international travel costs.  I talked to a young(ish) expat and he said that he traveled too much for the 13a to be cost effective for him.  On the 13a you have to pay around p3,000 every time you leave the country to get a return authorization; it keeps your visa active while you are gone. It is good for 1 year, but only single use.   On the SRRV you can enter and leave without losing the visa.  This expat still traveled for work and left the country 3 or 4 times a year for work.  So for him, the SRRV made more sense.

I rarely leave, so the 13a was fine for me.  It only cost p11,000 to get the visa and  ACR card.

Yes Tim, that is part of the problem for me also.

[sonjack2847]

I think anything that saves you the trouble of going to BI is worth it.I am on 13a.

[mogo51]

4 hours ago, scott h said:

You asked brother..............just keep it simple and get the 13a. Anytime we look for a loop hole in any regulation here in the Phil. we are just asking for trouble, even if such a loop hole exists chances are that the person you deal with getting it will not know of its existence or how to go about it. Unless there is a reason for not getting a 13a why go to the bother and stress.

IMHO the SRRV is a hook to get your money into the country one way or another.

 

Thanks Scott, but travel out of the country several times a year is one of the problems re 13A, the SRRV would be ideal.  I am not trying to get 'loopholes' just asking if anyone had heard the same as was suggested to me.

As far as getting money into the country, I have had no problems whatsoever to date.  Done it twice since I have been here, no difficulties.

[mogo51]

4 hours ago, Jack Peterson said:

I do believe you are right but as per PI rules I am not too sure it would be considered Ron's House even though he may have Paid for it. I think you are now in a Terraced House, Yes Ron? so the Land rule will apply against t the Condo Rule?

Exactly right Jack.  

[Gary D]

37 minutes ago, mogo51 said:

Well JFG I paid for it but of course not allowed to own it, a townhouse, in my wife's name..  I was aware of that provision, but does not apply in these circumstances, but have 25 year lease. Without going into details, my lease would be acceptable, as I was told so long as  it was not in wife's name which is the case it isn't, at this stage.

I've not heard of it being retrospective which in your case it would need to be.

[bigpearl]

1 hour ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Don't mean to hijack the topic but why do you say that ? 

Hijacking or sensationalism? Context JGF and nothing further said.

Cheers, Steve.

[Jollygoodfellow]

17 minutes ago, bigpearl said:

Hijacking or sensationalism? Context JGF and nothing further said.

Cheers, Steve.

Sorry just did not understand why you said marriage in Australia wont be recognised. Never mind.

[Jack Peterson]

41 minutes ago, Gary D said:

my lease would be acceptable, as I was told so long as  it was not in wife's name which is the case it isn't, at this stage.

Not wanting to burst any bubbles BUT I don't see how a Lease in whosoever name has a tangible equity for a deposit. Any money paid on a lease for for a specific issue. A lease surely  has no resale value as would land etc

 Just a thought 

[OnMyWay]

4 hours ago, Jack Peterson said:

Not wanting to burst any bubbles BUT I don't see how a Lease in whosoever name has a tangible equity for a deposit. Any money paid on a lease for for a specific issue. A lease surely  has no resale value as would land etc

 Just a thought 

No, not true.  Here in Subic Bay Freeport all the land is owned by the government and leased out to businesses and residents.  Typically the leases started at 50 years.  The leases can be sold and transferred to another lessee, and the government collects a 5% transfer fee on each transfer.  When the lease gets down to 25 years, you can purchase an additional 25 years.  I think mine is at 27 years so I will be paying to top it up to 50 in a few years.  The cost is reasonable (I hear, and I hope)

So the leases have a time value and an intrinsic value and a market value.  If the market demand is high, the prices go up.  If you improve the property, the price normally goes up.

I don't know if the same applies to a private party transaction lease, but if the lease can be transferred / sold, there would be a market value for it.

This thread has me interested to find out if my lease would qualify as an SRRV deposit, even though I am mid-way through the 13a process.

 

Edited November 29, 2017 by OnMyWay

[Clermont]

3 hours ago, OnMyWay said:

No, not true.  Here in Subic Bay Freeport all the land is owned by the government and leased out to businesses and residents.  Typically the leases started at 50 years.  The leases can be sold and transferred to another lessee, and the government collects a 5% transfer fee on each transfer.  When the lease gets down to 25 years, you can purchase an additional 25 years.  I think mine is at 27 years so I will be paying to top it up to 50 in a few years.  The cost is reasonable (I hear, and I hope)

 

I think you'll find it is under special zoning, In one province there is several towns and in the towns there are several barangays, out of this they get land taxes for Province improvements. Wages and transfer taxes and other taxes are a government collection for PI improvements.

As suggested by you Subic is lease only, my understanding is, Subic was leased by the Yanks and the lease was rented onto Japanese and Chinese interests for a manufacturing hub this is why only lease land is allowed. Outside Subic is another issue.

The PI still own the land it is only leased to foreign countries then released and if that lease is not honoured by the foreign country who has a lease agreement with the PI, it doesn't matter whether your PI or not, you could be in a bit of trouble, monetary wise.

As been written many times on this site, fully understand your legal position before signing the dotted line.

I'll bet this opens a can of worms.