Lately there's been a lot of press about foreign chambers of commerce challenging the "wisdom" of the changes of certain polcies such as the Foreign Business Act, Capital Control, etc. Sometimes I think their action makes it better for the rest of us, but sometimes think it only riles the powers that be and locals.

As well, there is also a lot of rebuttal from the super patriotic and conservative (old school domestic) stating that this challenge is only "foreigners trying to take advantage of the system and Thailand". Or, comments from the Gov't that these changes are in the best interest of all in Thailand, thus the foreign chambers are self serving, over reacting and don't know what they're talking about.

Personally I'd like to see Thailand do what's best for the country as a whole, but I'm not sure who's right. Comments??

Hiding and happy in Nontaburi.

I think the important issue is that there is an open discussion about these things sometimes.

As far as I am concenrned, the Foreign Chambers let their views be aired in a way which didn't piss anyone off, except those who would have get pissed off by things anyway - and this latter type exist anywhere. From my viewing of the Thai media, especially the business and economics TV shows, it was discussed intelligently and even handedly.

When it comes to policy, I think a culture here needs to be developed of white papers and general thought out discussion can happen and views can be aired. This is a long way off in Thailand, but places like TDRI and NESDB do their bit, and lots of informal discussion does go on.

The key thing is that the discussion was done with respect and good manners. Threats, ranting and raving are the surest ways to get on the wrong side of any Thai authority

I surely hope that some gentle persuasion will get the Gov't to at least realize that they should carefully consider negative repercussions of hasty policy changes. Even thought the Chambers seem to have quieted down a little about the issue, the press is still showing all sorts of private sector opposition the the FBA restrictions that some members of the Gov't seem so adamant to push through.

In my opinion this persistance without real defined reason seems to hint of ulterior motive. The reasons for setting up a company with a nominee structure are obvious and for the most part harmless, albeit possibly against certain clauses of the old law. On the other hand, I'm not sure those are reason enough to insist on changing the law to stop it all. Related, I hear the is still many ways around it, even if the proposed changes are pushed through. Something fishy, I suspect.