New Thai Customs Act Signed Into Law

May 22, 2017

New Thai Customs Act Signed Into Law

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017, confirmation of the formal enactment of Thailand’s new Customs Act B.E. 2560 (2017) was published in the Royal Gazette, the official public journal in which new laws are announced. The Act, which repeals the outdated and controversial Customs Act B.E. 2469 (1926) and its prior amendments, comes into effect 180 days from publication, and represents the culmination of many years of drafts, consultations, and sometimes contentious debate.

For example, many of the criminal provisions of the Customs Act of 1926 were not only onerous, but created prosecution incentives, shifted burdens of proof to an accused, and included penalties significantly out of proportion to the alleged wrongdoing. Similarly troubling was the former Act’s lack of clarity in the post-clearance audit and appeal process. The new Act deals substantially with many of these issues and offers relief to importers subject to the historically difficult customs environment.

Representative examples of key amendments to the new Customs Act include:

Elimination of strict liability presumptions on an accused for claims of customs duty evasion.
Elimination of presumed liability for officers, directors, and other authorized persons.
Decrease in the percentage of fines claimed as rewards for whistleblowers under the Customs Act and introduction of a cap on such rewards of THB 5 million.
Significant change in the calculation of criminal fines for claims of duty evasion. Previously, the fine was 4 times the combined price of good plus duty, while the new calculation for a fine is between 0.5 to 4 times the amount of duty evaded.
For the first time, the Court can apply discretion in calculation of criminal fines.
Imposition of limits on post-clearance audit timelines.
Creation of clear timelines for Board of Appeal review.
Imposition of a clear deadline for return of duty guarantees.

The Customs Act of 2017 represents a significant step forward in introducing improvements in fairness and clarity for those involved in the customs clearance process in Thailand—improvements that will benefit not only business operators and importers, but the Thai government itself.

Related Professionals

Thawat Damsa-ard

Thailand

+66 2056 5500

Email

Kasamesunt Teerasitsathaporn

Partner

Thailand

+66 2056 5555

Email

Michael Ramirez

Counsel

Thailand

+66 2056 5794

Email

RELATED INSIGHTS

October 21, 2024

Thai Court Decision Moves Design Assessment Closer to International Standards

Thailand’s Central Intellectual Property and International Trade (IP&IT) Court has delivered a favorable ruling for Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd., a major player in the tire manufacturing industry, regarding the registration of its motorcycle tire design patent. In this case, Tilleke & Gibbins represented Sumitomo in successfully advocating for recognition of the unique design elements in the company’s motorcycle tire products. Case Overview The case revolved around Sumitomo’s two design patent applications for motorcycle tire designs, which were initially rejected by the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) on the grounds that they were similar to prior art. Based on an examination of the design elements, primarily focusing on the tire tread patterns, the DIP’s Patent Board had concluded that Sumitomo’s designs were not sufficiently unique to warrant patent protection, as the tread patterns of the new designs were deemed too similar to one found in prior art for tire products. In response, Tilleke & Gibbins filed a complaint with the IP&IT Court on behalf of Sumitomo, seeking a revocation of the Patent Board’s decision and requesting that the court compel the DIP, as the defendant, to proceed with the registration of Sumitomo’s design patents. The complaint emphasized that the designs were novel and distinct, warranting patent protection under Thai law. Legal Strategy The firm’s legal argument focused on the interpretation of Thai patent law, particularly regarding the protection of a product’s external appearance, and emphasized that the determination of a design’s novelty must consider the product’s overall appearance rather than isolating individual features. This approach is consistent with international guidelines on design patents, which require the evaluation of novelty and distinctiveness based on how an informed user would perceive the design as a whole. While Sumitomo’s tire tread patterns may share some superficial similarities to existing designs, the overall impression

October 2, 2024

Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Thailand: Procedural Notes for Practitioners

As Thailand is a contracting state of the UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, international arbitral awards can, in principle, be enforced in Thailand. However, not all awards will necessarily be enforceable. The Arbitration Act BE 2545 (2002) gives courts the discretion to deny the enforcement of an award if the court determines that enforcing it would be contrary to “public order or the good morals of the people” (often referred to as “public policy”). Similarly, the Arbitration Act allows a court to set aside a domestic award if its recognition would violate public policy. This discretionary power of the court is prescribed by the law and does not require any party to make an argument on public policy grounds to trigger such power. A recent Supreme Court judgment demonstrates that a court considering an award will review the legality of the arbitral proceedings as well as the content of the award. In this case, the Supreme Court set aside an award on the grounds that it violated public policy because it was the result of arbitration that did not proceed in accordance with the relevant law. Under Thai bankruptcy law, after the Bankruptcy Court accepts a request for rehabilitation of a debtor, all civil proceedings against that debtor, including arbitration proceedings, must be stayed until the court orders otherwise or until the rehabilitation case ceases. In this matter before the Supreme Court, however, the arbitrator continued with the arbitration and went on to render an award even after the court had accepted the request for rehabilitation. The award was later challenged to be set aside on the grounds that continuing with the arbitration was against public policy. While setting aside the award was arguably unnecessary, in this case (as the relevant bankruptcy law

October 1, 2024

Lexology Panoramic: Labor and Employment Disputes 2024 – Vietnam Chapter

Three of Tilleke & Gibbins’ labor and employment specialists in Vietnam have contributed the Vietnam chapter to the newly issued Labor and Employment Disputes 2024, a comprehensive guide from Lexology Panoramic to labor and employment dispute resolution in various jurisdictions around the world. The Vietnam chapter covers the following topics: Pre-action considerations: Key requirements, third-party funding, contingency fee arrangements Issuing a claim: Forum, territorial jurisdiction, standing, commencing claims, fees, service Defendants and legal personality: Types of claims, time limits, counterclaims Case management: Procedure, rules, amendments to claims, adding parties to proceedings, consolidating proceedings Class and collective actions: Special considerations Evidence: Witnesses, tactical considerations Interim relief: Availability, requirements Trial: Hearings conduct and typical time frames, confidentiality and public access, media reporting Elements of successful claims and burden of proof Alternative dispute resolution: Available types, requirements and expectations Enforcement: Collective employment and labor rights, enforcement of collective rights, standing Remedies and enforcement: Available remedies, assessing compensation, enforcement mechanisms Appeals: Appeal procedure and time frames, other means of challenge Update and trends: Recent cases and developments, technology developments, other issues The Vietnam chapter was authored by Truc Thi Thanh, Linh Ngoc Nguyen, and Kien Trung Trinh. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Thailand chapter to Labor and Employment Disputes 2024.

October 1, 2024

Lexology Panoramic: Labor and Employment Disputes 2024 – Thailand Chapter

Four of Tilleke & Gibbins’ labor and employment specialists in Bangkok have contributed the Thailand chapter to the newly issued Labor and Employment Disputes 2024, a comprehensive guide from Lexology Panoramic to labor and employment dispute resolution in various jurisdictions around the world. The Thailand chapter covers the following topics: Pre-action considerations: Key requirements, third-party funding, contingency fee arrangements Issuing a claim: Forum, territorial jurisdiction, standing, commencing claims, fees, service Defendants and legal personality: Types of claims, time limits, counterclaims Case management: Procedure, rules, amendments to claims, adding parties to proceedings, consolidating proceedings Class and collective actions: Special considerations Evidence: Witnesses, tactical considerations Interim relief: Availability, requirements Trial: Hearings conduct and typical time frames, confidentiality and public access, media reporting Elements of successful claims and burden of proof Alternative dispute resolution: Available types, requirements and expectations Enforcement: Collective employment and labor rights, enforcement of collective rights, standing Remedies and enforcement: Available remedies, assessing compensation, enforcement mechanisms Appeals: Appeal procedure and time frames, other means of challenge Update and trends: Recent cases and developments, technology developments, other issues The Thailand chapter was authored by Eric M. Meyer, Chusert Supasitthumrong, Pathanin Sornchangwat, and Chayathorn Kruatao, all in the Thailand dispute resolution and litigation team. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Vietnam chapter to Labor and Employment Disputes 2024. The full Thailand chapter is available below as a PDF.

You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

Industries

Practices

May 22, 2017