Tag: Commercial

on by

Agreement on Reciprocal Trade Negotiations Enter Final Drafting, with Signature Possible in November 2026

Introduction

Negotiations on the Agreement on Reciprocal Trade between Thailand and the U.S. (the “ART”) have moved from agreement in substance to the preparation of the final legal text. On 7 October 2026, the Prime Minister stated publicly that the parties were working on the concluding paragraph of the instrument and that signature was anticipated during the U.S. President’s visit to Asia in November 2026.

The Prime Minister further disclosed that Thailand had received a letter from the U.S. President indicating that officials of both countries would settle the final text, with the expectation that the ART could be signed during that visit. Responsibility for the remaining negotiations has been assigned to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce.

Signature could take place at either of two events in November:

  • the ASEAN Summit, to be held in the Philippines from 16 to 18 November 2026; and
  • the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (“APEC”) meetings, to be held in China on 18 and 19 November 2026.

The Scope of What Has Been Agreed

The Ministry of Commerce has confirmed that Thailand and the U.S. have reached agreement on the substance and governing principles of the ART, and that the outstanding work consists of technical details and legal drafting.

This characterization requires careful reading. The framework announced by Thailand and the U.S. in October 2025 (the “October 2025 Framework”) is a separate instrument from the ART, and neither determines the tariff rate applicable to Thai goods.

Under the October 2025 Framework, Thailand undertook to eliminate tariffs on approximately 99% of U.S. goods, while the U.S. proposed to maintain a reciprocal tariff of 19% on originating Thai goods, subject to a zero rate for selected products. U.S. tariff policy has since been reconstituted on a different statutory basis. Thai goods are currently subject to a Section 301 tariff of 12.5% arising from the forced labor case, and a separate investigation into structural excess capacity remains undetermined.

Thailand’s stated objective is that the aggregate tariff burden should approximate the former benchmark of 19% and should in no event exceed the burden borne by regional competitors.

Final Drafting Is Not Concluded

Three matters remain unresolved despite the advanced stage of the negotiations:

  • The legal text is not settled. Final drafting determines the scope of commitments, exceptions and reservations, transitional periods, and the dispute settlement mechanism. These provisions ordinarily determine the commercial value of an agreement and are not ancillary to the principles already agreed.
  • The Section 301 determination in the excess capacity case has not been issued. Section 301 proceeds by discrete cases, and the resulting rates are cumulative. Any rate arising from that case will therefore be added to the rate applicable under the forced labor case, not substituted for it.
  • Signature is not entry into force. An instrument of this scope will require the completion of domestic approval procedures in Thailand before it takes effect, and parliamentary approval should be assumed to be required. Preferential treatment should not be anticipated from the date of signature.

The Commercial Context

Bilateral trade has expanded throughout the period of tariff uncertainty, and Thailand’s trade surplus with the U.S. has grown faster than trade itself.

  • 2024: The surplus was USD 35.616 billion, an increase of 23%. Bilateral trade totaled USD 74.272 billion, up 10%. Thai exports reached USD 54.944 billion, up 14%, while imports were almost unchanged at USD 19.328 billion.
  • 2025: The surplus reached USD 51.629 billion, up 45%. Bilateral trade rose 26% to USD 93.409 billion. Thai exports increased 32% to USD 72.519 billion, and imports increased 8% to USD 20.890 billion.
  • First eight months of 2026: The surplus stood at USD 45.304 billion, up 44%. Bilateral trade reached USD 84.164 billion (approximately THB 2.701 trillion), up 42% on the same period in 2025. Thai exports rose 43% to USD 64.734 billion, and imports rose 40% to USD 19.430 billion.

The composition of that growth has changed. In 2024 and 2025, Thai exports grew far faster than imports from the U.S. In the first eight months of 2026, exports and imports have grown at almost the same rate: 43% for exports and 40% for imports.

The surplus is both the reason for the tariff measures applied by the U.S. and the principal matter the ART is intended to address.

The Composition of the Trade

Thai exports to the U.S. in the first eight months of 2026 were led by technology and industrial goods:

  • computers, equipment and components: USD 20.525 billion, up 72%;
  • telephones, facsimile equipment and related components: USD 7.637 billion, up 146%;
  • rubber products: USD 2.788 billion, down 11%;
  • transformers and components: USD 2.431 billion, up 38%; and
  • machinery and mechanical parts: USD 2.335 billion, up 40%.

Imports from the U.S. were led by energy and capital goods:

  • crude oil: USD 5.230 billion, up 80%;
  • natural gas: USD 1.959 billion, up 140%;
  • aircraft, gliders and aviation equipment: USD 1.602 billion, up 229%;
  • machinery and components: USD 1.269 billion, down 10%; and
  • chemicals: USD 997 million, up 21%.

Two observations arise from these figures. First, the growth in energy imports is consistent with the October 2025 Framework, which contemplated Thai purchases of U.S. liquefied natural gas, crude oil and ethane. It suggests that commitments of that kind are being implemented ahead of signature.

Second, export growth is concentrated in electronics and communications equipment, a category particularly exposed to scrutiny of declared origin, given current U.S. attention to transshipment and to goods incorporating third-country inputs.

Conclusion

The negotiations are at an advanced stage, but the outstanding matters are not merely formal. The final text will determine the scope and durability of the commitments assumed on both sides. The Section 301 excess capacity determination, which lies entirely outside the bilateral process, will determine a component of the tariff burden that is additional to the rate currently in force. The completion of domestic approval procedures will determine when any preferential treatment becomes available.

The prospect of signature in November is therefore a significant development in the negotiations, not a resolution of the tariff position. Until the text is published and the Section 301 case is concluded, the applicable rate remains indeterminate, and businesses are best advised to plan against a range rather than a single figure.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

IMF–World Bank Annual Meetings: Thailand Outlines Future-Ready Economic Priorities and Launches the Bangkok Blueprint to Combat Digital Financial Fraud

Introduction

Thailand hosted the 2026 Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund (the “IMF”) and the World Bank Group (the “Annual Meetings”) from 12 to 18 October 2026, the first time in 35 years that the country has hosted the event. During the Annual Meetings, the Thai government set out its economic priorities. The IMF and the World Bank Group, together with the Bank of Thailand (the “BOT”), also launched a new international framework to combat digital financial fraud.

Future-Ready Thailand

During the Annual Meetings, Prime Minister presented the “Future-Ready Thailand” vision, which calls for a shift from volume-driven growth to value creation and higher productivity. Its principal priorities are to:

  • upgrade the food industry towards health foods and high-value agricultural products;
  • move manufacturing up global value chains, particularly in AI, advanced manufacturing and future mobility, while promoting technology transfer to Thai suppliers;
  • leverage data centre investment to expand the digital economy;
  • develop high-value services, including medical and wellness, tourism and the creative economy; and
  • reduce regulatory barriers under the “Reinvent Thailand” initiative and pursue membership of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”).

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance identified five frontier industries, selected by a joint public–private committee:

  • smart agriculture and food processing;
  • smart electronics;
  • future mobility;
  • medical and wellness services; and
  • the creative economy.

He also indicated that foreign participation in the services sector should be expanded.

Under the government’s AI strategy, a “Skill Bridge” programme will link investors with educational institutions to develop the required workforce. The government also intends to reduce computing and AI costs for start-ups and small and medium-sized enterprises (“SMEs”).

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance further positioned Thailand as a “Trusted Connector” between major economies and smaller states. He noted that foreign applications for investment promotion rose by 47% in the first half of 2026, and he said that the yield of approximately 2.4% on Thailand’s 10-year government bonds reflects continued fiscal discipline.

The Bangkok Blueprint

On 14 October 2026, the IMF and the World Bank Group, working with the BOT, launched the Bangkok Blueprint for Fraud-Resilient Financial Services (the “Bangkok Blueprint”). The framework responds to digital financial fraud, which the IMF estimates causes global losses of USD 0.5 trillion to USD 1 trillion each year. It sets out 12 considerations under five pillars:

  1. Strategic and legal foundations: a national strategy, clearly assigned responsibilities, and powers to share information and freeze assets promptly;
  2. Measures across the fraud cycle: protection built into products by design, real-time detection and redress for victims;
  3. Use of existing frameworks: cybersecurity standards, anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) measures, and criminal enforcement;
  4. Domestic and international cooperation: coordination among financial institutions, telecommunications providers, digital platforms and authorities, including the cross-border freezing of funds; and
  5. Consumer protection and resilience: public awareness, accessible reporting channels and compensation mechanisms.

The Bangkok Blueprint is not legally binding, and countries may adapt it to their own legal systems. Thailand’s “Connect the Dots” initiative, which centralises fraud data across agencies, was cited as a practical example.

At the launch, the World Bank Group called for a shift from customer identification (Know Your Customer) to the analysis of transaction behavior (Know Your Transaction). The Financial Stability Board urged technology platforms to take responsibility for fraudulent content on their services.

Implications for Investors

  • Projects in the frontier industries, digital infrastructure and high-value services are likely to receive stronger policy support, including BOI investment promotion, particularly where they offer technology transfer and local workforce development.
  • The Reinvent Thailand initiative and OECD accession may improve regulatory predictability, but may also raise governance and compliance expectations.
  • Any liberalization of the services sector would likely require amendments to existing foreign business restrictions and should be monitored.
  • Financial institutions, payment providers, fintech companies and digital platforms should anticipate heightened expectations regarding fraud prevention, transaction monitoring and information sharing.

Key Takeaways

  • Thailand is prioritizing value creation, productivity and quality investment.
  • Five frontier industries and digital infrastructure are the focus of investment promotion.
  • The Bangkok Blueprint, while non-binding, signals stricter anti-fraud expectations for financial and digital service providers.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Thailand Advances U.S. Trade Negotiations and Tightens Controls on False Origin Declarations

On 28 September 2026, Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce, announced that Thailand and the United States (the “U.S.”) had reached an agreement in principle on the key terms of the proposed Agreement on Reciprocal Trade (the “ART”). Thailand aims to finalize the remaining details before the U.S. announces the outcome of its investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.

In parallel, Thailand is strengthening measures to prevent foreign goods from being falsely declared as Thai-origin. These measures are intended to address U.S. concerns over possible transshipment and to support the ART negotiations.

Status of the ART Negotiations

According to the Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce’s discussion with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”), there were no major obstacles identified.

The two countries have agreed on the principal terms of the ART. Technical details and final wording remain under review. The ART is therefore not yet final, and its terms remain subject to further coordination.

Measures Against False Origin Declarations

To build U.S. confidence in Thai exports, the Thai Customs Department (“CD”) is working with the Department of Foreign Trade (“DFT”) to tighten controls on false origin declarations.

The Director-General of the CD, noted that Thailand’s Manufacturing Production Index (“MPI”) understates actual manufacturing output. The index has remained comparatively low even as exports to the U.S. have grown, partly because several large exporters are not captured in it. This gap has fed U.S. concerns over transshipment, where foreign goods are falsely declared as Thai-origin, and over structural excess production capacity.

In response, the CD is improving the accuracy of MPI data, working with the DFT to strengthen origin verification, and tightening enforcement. The key measures are:

  • Stronger origin verification. In fiscal year 2027, the CD and DFT plan to enhance origin checks through the Paperless Rules of Origin Verification System (“ROVERs Plus”). This online platform reviews raw materials, production costs and manufacturing processes to determine whether goods satisfy the applicable rules of origin. Exporters of designated goods to the U.S. who apply for a Certificate of Origin (“C/O”) must complete this verification. The measure targets goods that are merely repackaged or relabeled.
  • Stricter customs enforcement. The CD is placing greater emphasis on legal penalties, in addition to seizing goods. Depending on the circumstances, the following provisions of the Customs Act B.E. 2560 (2017) may apply:
    • Section 202 (incorrect declarations): Submitting incorrect or incomplete declarations or information that may mislead customs officers is punishable by a fine of up to THB 500,000.
    • Section 244 (evasion of import or export restrictions): Violations are punishable by a fine of up to THB 500,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both.

Key Takeaways

  • Thailand and the U.S. have agreed on the ART’s principal terms, but technical details remain under review.
  • The CD is improving MPI data and, with the DFT, strengthening origin verification to address U.S. transshipment concerns.
  • Together with stricter enforcement, these steps are expected to build U.S. confidence in Thai exports and support the conclusion of the ART.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Thailand’s Cabinet Approves Negotiation Framework and Acknowledges Composition of Delegation for CBD COP 17

Introduction

On 14 October 2026, the Thai Cabinet, as proposed by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (the “MNRE”), approved Thailand’s negotiation framework and acknowledged the composition of the Thai delegation for the following meetings (collectively, the “Meetings”):

  1. the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (“CBD COP 17”);
  2. the 12th meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (“CP-MOP 12”); and
  3. the 6th meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Nagoya Protocol (“NP-MOP 6”).

The Meetings commenced on 19 October 2026 and are scheduled to conclude on 30 October 2026 in Yerevan, Armenia.

Thailand’s participation aims to contribute to international decision-making on biodiversity and to apply the outcomes in developing national policies and measures suited to Thailand’s circumstances. It is also expected to strengthen Thailand’s role in international discussions and promote cooperation on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.

Background and Global Biodiversity Goals

On 29 January 2004, Thailand became a Party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (the “CBD”), which aims to conserve biodiversity, promote its sustainable use, and ensure the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources.

To advance these objectives, the Parties to the CBD adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (the “KM-GBF”) at the second part of the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD (“CBD COP 15 Part 2”) in December 2022. The KM-GBF serves as a global framework for biodiversity action. It establishes a 2030 Mission and targets to guide efforts towards its long-term goals for 2050:

  • 2030 Mission and Targets: To halt and reverse biodiversity loss and put nature on a path to recovery by 2030, supported by 23 targets (the “2030 Targets”) covering ecosystem conservation and restoration, species protection, pollution reduction, the sustainable use of biodiversity, fair and equitable benefit-sharing, and financial support.
  • 2050 Goals: Four long-term goals addressing (i) the conservation and restoration of biodiversity; (ii) the sustainable use of biodiversity; (iii) the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources; and (iv) the financial and other resources needed to implement the KM-GBF.

Key Focus of the Meetings

A key focus of the Meetings, particularly CBD COP 17, will be to review the implementation of the KM-GBF, assess collective progress towards the 2030 Targets and 2050 Goals, identify achievements and implementation challenges, and determine where further action is needed.

The Meetings will also consider measures to accelerate implementation, particularly through increased financial support, stronger international cooperation and enhanced national efforts to achieve global biodiversity goals.

Thailand’s Position and Participation

1. Thailand’s Negotiation Framework

The negotiation framework, prepared by the MNRE through the Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning (“ONEP”), is based on two key principles:

  • Multilateral cooperation: Support international cooperation and consensus-based decision-making to advance the objectives of the CBD, its related protocols and the KM-GBF, while safeguarding Thailand’s national interests.
  • Equity and national sovereignty: Promote sustainable development, respect countries’ sovereign rights over biological and genetic resources, and take into account the needs, priorities and circumstances of developing countries.

Thailand will also seek to advance key issues, namely biodiversity financing, nature restoration, fair and equitable benefit-sharing from digital sequence information on genetic resources, local community participation, and the integration of biodiversity conservation into relevant sectors.

2. Composition of the Thai Delegation

The Thai delegation will be led by the Permanent Secretary of the MNRE and will comprise representatives of the following 10 government agencies:

  • Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning;
  • Department of Marine and Coastal Resources;
  • Department of Water Resources;
  • Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation;
  • Department of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs;
  • Department of Fisheries;
  • Office of the National Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation Policy Council;
  • Thailand Science Research and Innovation;
  • National Science and Technology Development Agency; and
  • Biodiversity-Based Economy Development Office (Public Organization).

Key Takeaways

  • A key focus of the Meetings, particularly CBD COP 17, will be to review the implementation of the KM-GBF and assess collective progress towards the 2030 Targets and 2050 Goals.
  • Thailand will emphasize multilateral cooperation, sustainable development, equity, and national sovereignty over biological and genetic resources, while advancing key issues such as biodiversity financing and fair and equitable benefit-sharing.
  • Decisions adopted at the Meetings may influence Thailand’s future biodiversity policies and measures and may, in some cases, require amendments to domestic laws. Further developments should therefore be monitored.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

BOT Proposes New Digital Channel Security Requirements to Strengthen Fraud Prevention

The Bank of Thailand (the “BOT”) is conducting a public consultation (the “Consultation”) from 7 October to 6 November 2026 on the draft BOT Notification on Digital Channel Security (the “Draft Notification”). The Consultation seeks feedback from relevant stakeholders.

The Draft Notification aims to strengthen the security of financial and payment services delivered through digital channels, in response to evolving cybersecurity threats and unauthorized payment fraud.

Background and Objectives

In 2025, the BOT introduced mobile banking security requirements to protect users against cybersecurity threats and unauthorized payment fraud. Although these requirements share similar objectives and principles, they were issued under three separate notifications, each applicable to a different category of service provider:

  • BOT Notification No. 4/2568: financial institutions;
  • BOT Notification No. 17/2568: specialized financial institutions; and
  • BOT Notification No. 18/2568: regulated e-money service providers offering services through mobile applications.

Fraudsters have since expanded their activities beyond mobile banking applications to other digital channels, in particular internet banking and the mobile applications of non-bank financial service providers.

To address these risks, the BOT proposes to extend the security requirements to internet banking and additional categories of service providers, and to consolidate the three existing notifications into a single regulatory framework. These changes are intended to strengthen fraud prevention, ensure consistent security standards and enhance public confidence in Thailand’s financial and payment systems.

Key Principles and Changes

The Draft Notification proposes a unified security framework covering a broader range of digital financial services and service providers. Its key requirements, and the changes from the existing framework, are summarized below.

(1) Repeal of Existing Notifications

The Draft Notification would repeal and replace the three existing notifications with a single notification establishing consistent security requirements for all covered service providers.

(2) Definitions and Scope of Application

The Draft Notification would expand the existing scope in three key respects:

  • Digital Channels: The scope would extend from mobile banking applications to both mobile banking and internet banking.
  • Service Providers: The number of covered categories would increase from three to six, comprising financial institutions, specialized financial institutions, regulated e-money service providers, credit card business operators, regulated personal loan business operators and regulated nano-finance business operators (collectively, the “Service Providers”). The last three categories would be newly covered.
  • Covered Services: The framework would apply only to services that enable individual customers to (i) transfer money to an account held with a different bank or service provider (for example, an interbank transfer); or (ii) withdraw cash from ATMs or other electronic machines (for example, a cardless withdrawal initiated through a mobile banking application).

Accordingly, the Draft Notification would not cover all financial services offered through mobile banking applications or internet banking, but only the services specified above.

(3) Security Requirements

The Draft Notification would incorporate the existing mobile banking security measures into the expanded framework and require Service Providers to implement security measures in three key areas:

  • Prevention of Unauthorized Payment Fraud: Service Providers would be required to implement secure customer identification and authentication, including Know Your Customer (“KYC”) procedures or reliable multi-factor authentication (“MFA”) for service registration and for installation on new devices. Additional measures include account and device restrictions, MFA for specified high-risk transactions, restrictions on the use of SMS and email one-time passwords (OTPs) for certain transactions, and transaction alerts.
  • Prevention of Service Provider Impersonation: Service Providers would be required to restrict links sent via SMS and email, as well as links requesting sensitive information through social media, subject to specified exceptions. They would also be required to monitor and respond to fraudulent websites and applications that impersonate their services.
  • Mobile Application Security: Service Providers offering covered services through mobile applications would be subject to additional requirements, including customer data protection, encryption, secure communications, and safeguards against unauthorized access, malware and application tampering. Facial verification would also be required, subject to specified exceptions, for the following transactions:
    • a single transfer of THB 50,000 or more;
    • cumulative transfers reaching THB 200,000 per day; and
    • an increase of THB 50,000 or more in the daily transfer limit.

(4) Exemptions

Service Providers that are unable to comply with certain requirements due to necessary or exceptional circumstances may request an exemption from the BOT, supported by reasons and an implementation plan.

For circumstances existing before the Draft Notification takes effect, exemption requests must be submitted within seven days after its effective date, in accordance with the transitional provisions. The BOT would consider each request within 30 business days of receiving all required documents.

(5) Effective Date

The Draft Notification would generally take effect 30 days after its publication in the Government Gazette. However, certain MFA requirements relating to cash withdrawals and credit drawdowns through ATMs would take effect 90 days after publication.

Current Status and Next Steps

Following the Consultation, the BOT is expected to review the feedback received and consider any necessary revisions before issuing the final notification.

The Draft Notification carries a proposed signing date in January 2027, which suggests that issuance is anticipated around that time. However, the BOT has not confirmed the final issuance date, which remains subject to the outcome of the Consultation and the subsequent regulatory process.

Key Takeaways

  • The BOT proposes to replace three existing notifications with a single notification covering both mobile banking and internet banking, and to expand regulatory coverage from three to six categories of service providers.
  • Covered Service Providers would be required to implement measures against unauthorized payment fraud and impersonation, including customer authentication, transaction alerts and additional mobile application safeguards.
  • The Consultation remains open until 6 November 2026. Once issued, the Draft Notification would generally take effect 30 days after publication in the Government Gazette, with certain requirements taking effect after 90 days. Relevant Service Providers should review their existing security measures and prepare for compliance.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

DIP: WIPO GRATK Study Puts Genetic Resource Records in Focus

No new filing duty yet:

The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) has published WIPO GRATK, a study of the possible effects and benefits of Thailand joining the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. The publication signals that accession is under study; it does not mean Thailand has joined the treaty or that patent applicants must now make new disclosures.

The treaty would require a patent applicant whose invention is based on genetic resources to disclose their country of origin or, if that is unknown, their source. If the invention is based on associated traditional knowledge, the application would identify the Indigenous Peoples or local community that provided it, or the source of that knowledge. The treaty will enter into force after 15 eligible parties have ratified or acceded. It has not yet been done so.

The business issue is the paper trail:

For companies working with biological materials, the information needed for a patent application may be spread across research partners, suppliers, universities and other organizations. A company may know what material was used in an invention but lack a reliable record of where it came from or how it was obtained. That gap could complicate patent preparation if the treaty’s disclosure rules later apply.

Biotechnology, agriculture, pharmaceutical and food businesses should look at how they record the source of samples and related traditional knowledge. Research and material transfer agreements can help by requiring partners to provide provenance information and pass it along when materials change hands. The same records may help teams address permissions and benefit-sharing arrangements under applicable rules.

Thai companies seeking patents overseas should also check the requirements in each filing country. Foreign disclosure rules may affect an application even if Thailand has not joined WIPO GRATK. The DIP study is a timely reason to examine these practices, but businesses should read its recommendations before making changes to filing procedures or contract templates. Study itself creates no new obligation. DIP’s earlier consultation identified potential benefits in protecting genetic resources and associated local knowledge, improving patent transparency and supporting fair benefit sharing.

Key takeaways:

• DIP’s study concerns possible accession; it does not establish that Thailand has acceded.

• WIPO GRATK’s disclosure requirement will apply when Thailand joins WIPO GRATK.

• Businesses should check whether their research and supply arrangements preserve reliable records of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

• Thai applicants filing abroad should check the disclosure rules in each relevant jurisdiction.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

FDA: Building a Telepharmacy Platform—What Developers Need to Address

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has opened a regulated route for licensed modern pharmacies to provide telepharmacy services through recognized digital applications. For businesses developing healthcare platforms, the opportunity extends beyond connecting patients with pharmacists: it involves building a system that supports consultations, medicine supply, and delivery within the applicable regulatory framework. The FDA has established separate procedures for considering telepharmacy applications and for pharmacies seeking to provide the service. Platform developers should address both processes when designing their business model.

Platform Recognition and the Service Model:

FDA recognition of an application and authorization of a participating pharmacy serve different purposes. Recognition does not give the platform or every merchant using it a general right to sell medicines online. The service must operate through authorized pharmacies, with pharmacists providing professional services during pharmacy operating hours. Delivery must be traceable and comply with the prescribed service-area requirements. Developers therefore need to structure onboarding, consultation access, and fulfillment around the authorized pharmacy service.

Build Compliance into the Product;

A developer should assess the FDA’s application-review criteria before committing to the platform’s architecture. The FDA states that its consideration covers legal compliance, information security, and personal data protection. In practical terms, the product design should establish how participating pharmacies and pharmacists are verified, how patients reach the responsible pharmacist, and how consultation and delivery records can be retrieved when a problem arises. These design questions should be tested against the applicable criteria rather than left to individual pharmacies to resolve after launch.

Contracts, Data, and Commercial Responsibility:

The platform’s agreements should reflect who actually performs each part of the service. Matters to settle include responsibility for professional advice, medicine supply, pharmacist availability, delivery failures, complaints, refunds, and cooperation with regulatory inquiries. Patient data also requires particular attention: developers should map what information the platform collects, why it needs that information, who can access it, and what is disclosed to delivery providers. Decisions about consultation storage, analytics, and secondary uses of data should receive legal review before becoming standard product features. A platform that coordinates a transaction may still assume substantial obligations through its own conduct, contractual promises, and handling of patient information.

Key Takeaways:

For prospective platform operators, telepharmacy is a regulated healthcare service model that requires coordinated application recognition, pharmacy authorization, and professional involvement. The strongest starting point is to confirm the applicable FDA criteria, define the platform’s role, and translate that role into product controls and enforceable agreements. Regulatory review should precede launch and inform the core design, particularly where the platform manages consultations, patient records, or medicine delivery.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

DIP: New Facility Checks the Status of Corporate Trademark Owners

A new due-diligence link:

The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) has added a corporate-status check to its IP Search system. When a trademark record names a legal entity as owner, users can follow a link to the Department of Business Development’s DataWarehouse+ system to check the entity’s status, including whether it has been dissolved, liquidated, or struck off. The facility uses the DBD’s corporate records and is intended to help users identify risks when dealing with someone claiming rights in a company’s trademark.

What the facility means for transactions:

The link is an administrative service; it does not change the rules governing trademark ownership, assignment, or licensing. It gives buyers, licensees, business partners, and enforcement teams a useful first check when reviewing a trademark portfolio or a person’s authority to act for a corporate owner.

A dissolved company’s status should not, by itself, be treated as proof that its trademark rights have disappeared. Thai law provides that a company continues to exist to the extent necessary for liquidation, during which its affairs are settled and assets distributed. The trademark’s status therefore requires a closer review of the liquidation and asset-distribution records, any transfer documents, and the person’s authority to act.

Key takeaways:

  • Check the DBD status when a Thai trademark is registered to a company.
  • Treat the result as a due-diligence flag, then verify the company’s liquidation and asset records.
  • Before signing or enforcing, confirm the current owner and the other party’s authority to deal with the mark.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Thailand’s Revenue Department Launches Public Consultation on Draft Departure Tax Act: Key Proposed Principles and Implications

The Ministry of Finance, through the Revenue Department (the “RD”), the agency responsible for tax administration and collection, is proposing a revised framework for the collection of departure tax (the “Departure Tax”) under the Draft Departure Tax Act, B.E. [●] (the “Draft Act”).

From 30 September to 29 October 2026, the RD is conducting a public consultation (the “Public Consultation”) on 11 key proposed principles of the Draft Act (the “Proposed Principles”). As the Draft Act has not yet been released for public review, the Public Consultation seeks to inform affected persons and stakeholders of the Proposed Principles, their objectives and their potential impact, and to gather feedback for refining the Proposed Principles and preparing the Draft Act.

Background and Objectives

Thailand first introduced the Departure Tax under the Emergency Decree on Departure Tax, B.E. 2526 (1983) (the “Current Regime”), which took effect on 28 December 1983. Its purpose was to curb excessive outflows of foreign currency and safeguard Thailand’s balance of payments.

Under the Current Regime, the Departure Tax is structured as follows:

1. Persons subject to the Departure Tax

  • Thai nationals, including those born in Thailand or abroad and those who later acquired Thai nationality through naturalization.
  • Foreign nationals holding permanent residence in Thailand, as granted under the applicable immigration laws.

2. Departure Tax rates (maximum THB 5,000)

  • Departures by air: THB 1,000 per person per departure.
  • Departures by land or sea: THB 500 per person per departure.

In practice, however, the Departure Tax is currently exempt for all modes of departure. Departures by land or sea were exempted under Ministerial Regulation No. 4, B.E. 2529 (1986), effective 1 May 1986. Departures by air followed under Ministerial Regulation No. 6, B.E. 2534 (1991), effective 1 July 1991. Both exemptions were introduced in response to the economic conditions of the time and remain in force.

Key Principles of the Draft Act Under Public Consultation

To strengthen fiscal flexibility in responding to future emergencies, the Ministry of Finance has tasked the RD with reviewing the Departure Tax framework. The principal proposed change is to extend the Departure Tax to all persons departing Thailand, regardless of nationality, rather than limiting it to Thai nationals and foreign permanent residents as under the Current Regime.

The 11 Proposed Principles are summarized below:

  1. Persons subject to the Departure Tax: The Departure Tax would apply to all persons departing Thailand, regardless of nationality. The only exception would be carrier personnel, such as pilots and flight attendants, who travel without paying a fare while performing their duties.
  2. Departure Tax rate: The Draft Act would set a maximum rate of THB 5,000 per person per departure. The applicable rate would be prescribed by Ministerial Regulation.
  3. Exemptions: Categories of exempt persons would be prescribed by Ministerial Regulation.
  4. Initial phase: During the initial phase, the rate would be THB 1,000 per air departure, and no Departure Tax would be imposed on departures by land or sea. The Proposed Principles do not specify how long this phase would last after the Draft Act takes effect.
  5. Collection: The Departure Tax would be payable before departure. Where a ticket is purchased, the international passenger carrier or its ticketing agent would collect the tax together with the passenger fare.
  6. Travel without a ticket or fare: Where no ticket is purchased or issued, or no fare is paid or collected through a carrier or ticketing agent, travelers would pay the Departure Tax in accordance with rules and procedures prescribed by the Director-General of the RD.
  7. Commencement: The Draft Act would take effect 180 days after its publication in the Government Gazette.
  8. Non-application to previously purchased tickets: The Draft Act would not apply to tickets purchased before its effective date, even if the passenger departs after that date.
  9. Powers of competent officials: Competent officials would be empowered to assess and collect the Departure Tax, penalties and surcharges; to issue summonses and orders; and to search for or seize accounts, documents and other relevant evidence.
  10. Penalties and surcharges: A penalty of twice the amount of Departure Tax payable or required to be remitted would apply. In addition, a surcharge of 1.5% per month (or part thereof) would accrue on unpaid or unremitted Departure Tax, excluding penalties.
  11. Sanctions for non-compliance: The Draft Act would impose sanctions for tax evasion or attempted evasion involving false statements, false testimony, false evidence or other fraudulent means. Sanctions, including regulatory fines where applicable, would also apply to persons who obstruct or fail to cooperate with competent officials or who breach their statutory obligations.

Next Steps

After the Public Consultation closes, the RD will summarize the feedback received and publish a report on the results. The feedback will be used to refine the Proposed Principles, which will form the basis for preparing the Draft Act and proceeding to the subsequent legislative drafting process.

Key Takeaways

  • The proposed framework would apply to all persons departing Thailand, regardless of nationality, subject to prescribed exemptions.
  • The Draft Act would set an initial tax rate of THB 1,000 for air departures and no tax on land or sea departures. The duration of this initial phase has not been specified. The maximum tax rate will be in the amount of THB 5,000.
  • The Proposed Principles remain subject to the Public Consultation and may be revised in light of the feedback received before the Draft Act is finalized.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

BOI: New Screening Requirements for Data Center Investment Promotion

The Board of Investment (BOI) has introduced a mandatory screening requirement for Data Center projects seeking investment promotion, extending its application to certain pending applications and expansions of existing projects. Under BOI Notification No. Sor. 3/2569, projects must obtain prior approval from a BOI-designated subcommittee before submitting an investment-promotion application. The notification, published on the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) website, reflects increasing regulatory scrutiny of Data Center investments, particularly their demands on electricity infrastructure, water resources and the environment.

Mandatory Screening Before BOI Applications:

Notification No. Sor. 3/2569 replaces Notification No. Sor. 2/2569, which previously required confirmation from the ERC before an investment-promotion application could be submitted. Under the revised requirements, Data Center projects classified under Category 8.2.1.1 (high-energy-efficiency Data Centers) and Category 8.2.1.2 (other Data Centers) must instead obtain approval from a subcommittee designated by the BOI to screen Data Center projects. This approval is a prerequisite to submitting an application for investment promotion, introducing an additional regulatory stage that developers must address before proceeding with the BOI application process.

Pending Applications and the 30% IT Load Threshold:

Importantly, the notification is not limited to new applications. Clause 3 expressly extends its application to projects submitted under the previous investment-promotion policy that remain under consideration, as well as applications to amend existing projects where the proposed changes increase IT load by more than 30%. Accordingly, developers cannot assume that earlier applications are automatically exempt from the revised screening requirements. The 30% threshold is particularly significant for phased developments and capacity expansions, as an existing BOI-promoted project may require further screening when its approved IT load is substantially increased.

Implications for Data Center Developers:

The revised requirements introduce an additional consideration for investment planning and regulatory due diligence. Developers should assess the screening requirement before filing new applications, review the status of pending applications and evaluate whether planned capacity expansions exceed the prescribed IT load threshold. Electricity infrastructure, water availability and environmental considerations should also be addressed early in project planning, given their express recognition in the notification. These requirements are already operative and must be distinguished from the broader national Data Center regulatory proposals concerning building classification, electricity-consumption categories and Direct Power Purchase Agreements (Direct PPAs), which remain separate policy matters and are not implemented by this notification.

Key Takeaways:

  • Prior approval: Data Center projects under BOI Categories 8.2.1.1 and 8.2.1.2 require subcommittee approval before applying for investment promotion.
  • Pending applications: Projects submitted under the previous policy and still under consideration are subject to the revised requirements.
  • Expansion threshold: Project amendments increasing IT load by more than 30% are also covered.
  • Infrastructure scrutiny: Electricity, water resources and environmental considerations are central to the revised screening policy.
  • Separate regulatory framework: The BOI notification establishes an existing investment-promotion requirement, independently of the proposed national Data Center regulations.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles