Regatta Bay condo, Puerto Princessa, Palawan.

[Jollygoodfellow]

4 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

triple like.  That is a darn good question.  Would love to see legal links with any informed answers. 

Certainly not an informed answer but an opinion. Why not as long as the share in the condo building is correct at 60/40. 

[scott h]

20 hours ago, Sean said:

Maybe buy  10 units

I would look into a resort called Pico de loro in Batangas, they have a new wing of condo apartments being build, I am very impressed with that resort. if memory serves 1 bedrooms start at 12 mil pesos

Edited March 28, 2018 by scott h
update

[Dave Hounddriver]

44 minutes ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Why not as long as the share in the condo building is correct at 60/40. 

I thought the same, until the question was asked.  I like questions that get me thinking.  This one had me looking for Supreme Court decisions to see what they had to say and I found this little bit of info (I put the interesting stuff in bold print)

Quote

In Jacobus Bernhard Hulst v. PR Builders, Inc., the Supreme Court stated that foreign individuals are allowed to purchase condominium units and shares in a condominium corporation in the Philippines up to no more than 40% of the condominium corporation. The Court explained that “under this setup, the ownership of the land is legally separated from the unit itself. The land is owned by a condominium corporation and the unit owner is simply a member in this condominium corporation. As long as 60% of the members of this condominium corporation are Filipino, the remaining members can be foreigners.”

As I read that, it seems to me that any "foreign individuals" may purchase "condominium units" (plural) so I would be of the opinion that the only limit is the 60/40 rule.  Thus I see no reason why a foreigner cannot buy up 40% of the units if he is rich enough.  Heck, I cannot see any reason why a foreigner cannot lease the land, build a condo building and sell ALL the units to foreigners according to this bit of info:

Quote

 

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in an opinion issued on Feb. 6, 2012, stated that if the real property to be acquired is a condominium unit or any interest therein, the following rules should be taken into consideration:

If the condominium is set up on leased land, the condominium corporation may be wholly foreign-owned.

 

These quotes are from this law site.
 

[Gary D]

19 hours ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Can you please quote who you are answering?  Anyway buying a condo is not leasing. 

Strictly you are leasing. Once the lease on the land expires you are out.

[Dave Hounddriver]

11 minutes ago, Gary D said:

Strictly you are leasing. Once the lease on the land expires you are out.

If you read through the legalese in the link from my last post, there are two kinds of condos.  The ones built on leased land can be owned 100% by foreigners and the ones built on land owned by the condo association can only be 40% foreign owned.  Its all there for the reading.

[Gary D]

1 minute ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

If you read through the legalese in the link from my last post, there are two kinds of condos.  The ones built on leased land can be owned 100% by foreigners and the ones built on land owned by the condo association can only be 40% foreign owned.  Its all there for the reading.

They are still both leased land. Once the lease expires you are free to take your condo wherever you like.

[codermonkey]

I heard condos come with a 50 year lease, once it expires the condo association has to renegotiate the lease.

Now I'm sure this is just a formality, but you won't have any sway on the association. 

[Dave Hounddriver]

20 minutes ago, Gary D said:

They are still both leased land.

Not as I understand it.  In the Supreme Court case I referred to in my post, the condo association owned the building and the land and was a corporation that could be owned 40% by foreigners.  Did you read the link?  It is a legal explanation of condos that really impresses me.

I see no point in arguing about it rhetorically but if you can provide evidence that I am misinterpreting that decision then I would enjoy discussing it here.

5 minutes ago, codermonkey said:

I heard condos come with a 50 year lease

According to that legal link, some do.  Those are the ones that have no limits on how many foreigners can own units.  But I still say the SC decision I quoted says the condo association owns the land (in that type of condo) and the foreigner is a member of the condo association so it is not leased land.  But it is just an argument until someone wants to dig into it further and get more SC decisions.

Edited March 28, 2018 by Dave Hounddriver

[codermonkey]

I would want to know what protections in law if any exist regarding the extension.

The condo association owns the land and leases it to the condo owners.

1. How much can be charged for how long an extension. 
2. Who can inherit the property if I die
3. What rights does the land owner (association) have ?
4. Who maintains the block ? How are they incentivised to keep it maintained ?
5. Will any anti-social behavior rules be enforced in the condo development ? What happens with nuisance neighbors ?

If the block is not maintained the association can vote to sell the land and demolish the block.

Edited March 28, 2018 by codermonkey

[Dave Hounddriver]

4 minutes ago, codermonkey said:

I would want to know what protections in law if any exist regarding the extension.

Quote

In an opinion issued by the SEC on July 15 last year, the SEC clarified that although the Anti-Dummy Law bans foreign individuals from being elected or appointed as corporate officers in entities engaged in nationalized business activities, it allows foreign individuals to be represented in the board of directors or the governing body of these entities, provided that foreign representation in the governing body is in proportion to the foreign shareholdings of the entities

This means that foreigners can have seats in the governing body of the condo.  It means that the condo owners have a vote in what happens with the building.  In order for 51% of the voters to vote to tear it down there would have to be some financial gain to them.  Whatever it is, each member will get a share in that.

Example, if the land is worth more than the building then they vote to sell it and you get your share.  Seems logical that whether the voter is a filipino or a foreigner he is going to protect his financial interest and in a condo building, everyone's financial interest is interlinked.  IE :  What is good for them is gonna be good for you to IMHO.