Thailand Law Forum Thailand Law Forum  



By Dr. Suthiphon Thaveechaiyagarn**



Despite the 1997 financial crash resulting the severe recession, the Thai government had resisted protectionist pressures. Instead, the government has taken steps to reinforce its already increasingly outward-oriented trade and investment policies so as to foster economic recovery(1). These steps include progressively streamlining and liberalizing Thailand's trade regime. The large number of legislative changes has been implemented to improve transparency and accountability as well as to ensure adequate supervision of the financial system. The steps go along the line with the objectives of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to promote free trade by minimizing trade barriers.

Thailand had been actively involved in the Uruguay Round negotiations. From the start, its negotiating objectives include:
1. To assure greater trade liberalization of Thailand's trading partners with the aim to reduce or eliminate tariff and non-tariff measures;
2. To improve the effectiveness of the rules governing international trade to bring about fairness and transparency in the world market; and
3. To prevent any new trade barrier that could obstruct Thailand's international trade.

At the WTO's Singapore Ministerial Conference in 1995, working groups were established to study the feasibility and desirability of WTO rules on a range of issues including investment which became known as the "Singapore Issues". These issues are considered by many developing nations as venturing beyond the traditional market access scope of the WTO into a wider scope of domestic rule - making which seems to encroach on the sovereign rights of nations. The Singapore issues led to unsuccessful result at the 5th WTO Ministerial Conference in Cancun due to the concerted opposition by more than 70 countries. This failure creates doubts in the viability of the WTO and stagnancy to the WTO process. Many countries including Thailand have become frustrated by the slow pace of the WTO's multilateral approach and have turned instead to bilateral free-trade agreements (FTAs).

Currently, Thailand has undertaken a pro-active approach in strengthening the bilateral trade and economic relationship with the trading partners in an FTA framework. The Thai government has already concluded the FTAs with both China and Australia and has recently engaged in FTA negotiations with the U.S. government. While the Thai government insists that Thailand benefits from its bilateral FTAs, Thai activists have challenged the government's view. The author supports the view that the FTA path should not be conducted to replace the WTO route. While FTA is believed to bring a faster rate of trade liberalization among smaller group of countries, the WTO liberalizes trade in a much larger scale as it deals with 148 nations around the world. The WTO is a safeguard organization to protect nations with weak bargaining power against bilateral pressures. Therefore, FTA should be used merely to supplement the WTO mechanisms to speed up trade and investment liberalization among particular region. Since FTA leads to WTO-plus commitments, Thailand must be very careful when it conducts FTA negotiations with countries that have much stronger bargaining power like the U.S.

This article emphasizes the significance of the WTO to assist Thailand to overcome problems of trade barriers against more powerful trading partners. Experiences regarding the application of the WTO in Thailand will be examined to review whether Thailand has properly utilized the WTO mechanisms.


As an original member of the WTO, the obligations of.Thailand include the WTO main principles, i.e. MFN(2), national treatment(3), transparency(4), protection through tariff only(5), promotion of fair trades(6) and prohibition of quantitative restrictions as well as the specific obligations in accordance with the schedules of concessions and the other agreements and rules administered by the WTO. The main obligations of Thailand under the WTO which have affected Thai legislation can be summarized as follows:

1.1 Market Access

For the agricultural products, Thailand has obligated to reduce the tariff rates for all 740 items (6-7 digit Harmonized System) by equal rate reduction each year within ten years(7). Also, the non-tariff measures, for example, the quantitative restrictions of imports, the Thai government had applied to 23 agricultural products such as coffee bean, tea, garlic, pepper, rice, corn, soybean, sugar and some vegetable oil was to be under the tariffication process, namely, converting non-tariff measures into tariff measures(8). Beginning from 1995, the domestic subsidy for the agricultural sector has been subject to decrease equally each year from Baht 22,126.18 million to no more than Baht 19,028.48 million by the year of 2004(9).

For industrial products in general, Thailand was bound to reduce equally each year the tariff rates for 3,153 items (6-7 digit Harmonized System) for five years by the year 1999(10). However, in practice, the tariff rates collected by the Thai government for most items were below the rates announced. Thus, there were only 854 items needed to lower the tariff rates consistently with the binding rates.

1.2 Trade-Related Investment Measures

Thailand applied certain investment measures such as measures which require particular levels of local procurement by an enterprise ("local content requirements"). Such measures can restrict and distort trade. The commitments of Thailand under the Agreement on 'Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) include the elimination of local content requirement within five years (by 1999)(11).

1.3 Customs Valuation

Thailand was bound to legislate the law applying the valuation system according to the WTO principles, i.e., the GATT Valuation Agreement or the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement(12). Under Article VII: 2(a) of the GATT 1994, the value for customs purposes of imported merchandise should be based on the actual value of the imported merchandise on which duty is assessed, or of like merchandise, and should not be based on the value of merchandise of national origin or on arbitrary or fictitious values. Thailand, however, invoked the five-year transitional period to implement the provisions of the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement(13).

1.4 Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

The issue of intellectual property is connected to the economic interest of trading countries because EP becomes an indispensable element of goods and services. The inadequate protection of intellectual property rights may illegitimately increase the competitive edge and unfairly compete with the products of competitors because the cost of research and development is not incurred(14). Before the establishment of the WTO, Thailand was under pressure from some trading partners to substantially eliminate the copyright piracy and to bring up its overall protection and enforcement of IPRs to the accepted international standards. With the establishment of the WTO, the protection of IPRs is completely elevated to international level when the issue is made related to international trade. Thailand had obligations under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) to amend the Patent Act and the Trademark Act and to legislate new laws such as Geographical Indication, Trade Secret, and Layout-Design of Integrated Circuit(15).

1.5 Trade in Services

Under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), Thailand was bound to market access and national treatment in ten sectors of services, namely, business, communication, construction and related engineering, distribution, environment, finance, education, recreation, culture and sport, tourism and transport(16). In selecting the service sector to be bound with, the Thai government took into account of the following factors(17):

(1) being the service already open for foreign market access under Thai law by registering jointly with Thai partners as the juristic person in the proportion of 49:51;
(2) applying the law at the present level without requiring additional conditions or legislating new law neither restricting market access nor limiting national treatment to foreign services;
(3) having not so high in value of service at present and in the future;
(4) being the service that Thai people have little potential.

The commitments of Thailand under the GATS emphasized in maintaining the present status. Thus, the Schedule of Specific Commitments the Thai government proposed were at the level which the relevant Thai law at that time had permitted foreigners to perform the services(18). At the time when Thailand became the WTO Member, Thailand had no obligation under the GATS to amend any existing laws(19). However, the GATS requires Thailand to enter into successive rounds of negotiations with a view to further liberalize trade in beyond the initial commitments made(20). The level of liberalization, nevertheless, depends on the outcome of the negotiations. National policy objectives and the level of development of individual Members will be taken into account in the process of liberalization(21).

1.6 Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the WTO predecessor, has developed two principles that encourage fair international trade. The first principle is that prohibiting dumping which is imports of a product with an export price below its "normal value" causing injury to a domestic industry in the territory of the importing countries(22). The general anti-dumping provisions are found in Article VI of the GATT. The second principle is to prohibit the payment of unfair subsidies by opposing attempts of governments to distort the world market by specifically subsidizing exports(23). Article XVI of the GATT contains general provisions on subsidies.

Both principles allow the relevant authority to investigate dumping or subsidy and to impose a dumping duty or a countervailing duty in an amount to offset the amount of the dumping or the subsidy. At present, the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures under the WTO provide for greater clarity and more -detailed rules in dealing with dumping and subsidy(24).

In 1964, Thailand enacted the Anti-dumping Act B.E. 2507 to protect and promote the domestic industry. The legislation, however, did not have provisions dealing with subsidy and enough details on how to proceed in each stage of practices. Thus, in 1991, the Ministry of Commerce issued the Ministry of Commerce Announcement on Principles and Procedures for Imposing Special Duties on Goods Imported in Unfair Price and on Subsidized Goods Imported into Thailand B.E. 2534. However, later in 1995, the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practice and the Committee on Countervailing Measures under the WTO reviewed such Announcement and commented that the Announcement did not cover the details appeared in the WTO Agreements. In addition, interpretation in the investigation depended only on the discretion of the investigating committee. Consequently, Thailand was bound to revise or enact the law on anti-dumping and countervailing measures to be consistent with the WTO Agreements(25).

Part  2

* This article is adapted from the author's workshop paper presented at the 8th ASEAN Law Association General Assembly and Conference on November 29, 2003 to December 2, 2003, Singapore
** LL.B. (Hons) Thammasat, Barrister-at-Law (of Thai Bar), LL.M (Harvard), LL.M., SJD. (University of Pennsylvania); Judge and Secretary of the Civil Court of Thailand
(1) Trde Policy Review Body: Review of Thailand, WTO Press/TPRB/123, 17 December, 1999 at 2.
(2) GATT, Article I.
GATT, Article III.
(4) GATT, Article X.
(5) GATT, Article XL.
(6) GATT, Article VI.
(7) WTO and Thai Agricultural Products, a distribution document of the Department of Business Economics, May 2000, at 4 (in Thai).
(8) Id.
(9) Id. at 5.
(10) ASEAN Economics Division, Department of Business Economics, Market Access of Thailand under the WTO, at 4 (November 1995) (in Thai).
Chaiwoot Chaipan, Regional Collaboration in ASEAN and APEC: A Thai Perspective. Occasional Papers, Center for International Economics, Faculty of Economics. Chulalongkom University. at 59-60.
(12) Trade Policy Review: Thailand, Report by the Government, WT/TPR/G/63, 17 November 1999, at 11.1
(13) Id. at 16.
(14) Dhajjai Subhaholsiri, Intellectual Property System of Thailand 4 (2001).
(15) Trade Policy Review: Thailand, supra note 12. at 17.
(16) Id.
(17) Multilateral Trade Division. Department of Business Economics, General Agreement on Trade in Services, at 7 (August 1994) (in Thai).
(18) Id. at 8.
(19) Id.
(20) See GATS, Article XIX.
(21) Id.
(22) For good background and the development of the antidumping laws under GATT and the WTO. see Michael J. Trebilcock & Robert Howse. The Regulation of International Trade 97-124 (1995).
(23) For good background and the development of subsidies and countervailing duties under GATT and the WTO, see id. at 125-61.
(24) WTO Information and Media Relations Division. Trading into the Future: WTO World Made Organization 28-29 (1995).
(25) Trade Policy Review: Thailand, supra note 12.

Originally Published in The Intellectual Property and International Trade Law Forum
(Seventh Anniversary Current Issue 2004)

The Thailand Law Forum appreciates the assistance of sponsors for the development of the content of this website. Thailand probate lawyer, specialists, Chaninat and Leeds Ltd. Provided translations and content for the website. Chaninat & Leeds, a Bangkok law firm, assists with probate law in Thailand. For any submissions, comments, or questions, email the Thailand Law Forum at: Please read our Disclaimer.

© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)