Foreign Business Act Stopped

[Supaporn]

What does this have to do with FBA

[Bruce1]

I criticize when I think ordinary Thais, including my friends and students, are being cheated and ripped off or denied a better future. Its got nothing to do with superiority or inferiority. I'd do exactly the same in Australia. Its called democracy and free speech. Don't you think lots of Thais are also criticizing? Of course they are. Thats why the current regime is so jumpy.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

What does this have to do with FBA

First, many if not most foreign governments allow Thai and other foreign nationals to open businesses with few restrictions. Despite the statements by some in the government, Thais who open business abroad are treated in the same manner as any other business including businesses owned by nationals of the other country. Thais are not required to take nationals of the other country as majority partners in their business as is the case here. Thais can own 100% of the business they invest in. Then there is the law. The law in the other countries generally protects the interest of the minority partners or shareholders including Thai nationals should they choose that arrangement. The law in other countries generally ignores nationality when deciding cases including those where a national of that country is involved in litigation with a foreigner. In fact, in many countries there are commissions that exist specifically to protect minority rights including the rights of foreign nationals visiting or residing in that country. These commissions take an active role in protecting the rights of foreign nationals by prosecuting business but sometimes individuals or local governments who violate equal opportunity or equal protection laws. Not so in Thailand. Rarely does a court in Thailand protect a foreigner when he is involved in litigation against a Thai. William Monson is a good example of that. Over 20 years and his case still is not resolved. I guess they are waiting for him to die of old age. There are thousands of other foreigners you have never heard of who, like Monson, have lost money investing in minority shares of a Thai small business. And yet the government complains that foreigners cheat Thais and use that to justify the present system. Once the money is invested the foreigner has no say whatever. Its like a charitable contribution except it wasn't given intentionally. The foreigner has not rights to object if the Thai partner decides to award himself a new and improved salary along with expensive perks. That would be interfering with the right of the Thai to exclusively manage and control the business. The foreigner sees his investment and knowledge contribution dissappear whithout recourse. The exception to that is listed firms where there are some protections for minority investors. Then there is the matter of housing and land. In the countries where many foreigners with small businesses in Thailand come from Thais and other foreign nationals are allowed to buy and own houses and land. In some instancs there may be restrictions on th eamount of land they can own but often the upper limit when it exists is large. In one instance I recall where there was a restriction 300+ acres or over 700 rai can be owned by foreign nationals. Contrast that with the land laws of Thailand.

That is largely what such comments have to do with the FBA. The FBA's intent is to further restrict or eliminate foreign competition. At the same time the government is encouraging Thais to open business abroad. A recent article talked about the opportunities in Vietnam and emphasised the fact that Thais can open businesses there without local partners and thus own and control the company. Yet Thailand is not willing to offer reciprocity to citizens of countries who treat her citizens well. I suspect those pushing the FBA would scream loud and long if other countries suddenly decided to retroactively require Thais to sell all but a minority interest to a national of the country where they had set up businesses. They would scream even louder if Thais were foreced to sell thier home and land holdings abroad. In fact I would expect protests to be organized against the embassy of any country that might do so. Such is life in LOS.

Edited August 15, 2007 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[highdiver]

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

When I finally retire to Thailand with my Thai wife I know that I will have to comply with the rules to be allowed to stay.

Going by your own reasoning displayed here and even better in other threads (where you have clearly stated that even having a Thai wife shouldn't entitle you to anything): who says you have any right at all to be allowed to retire in Thailand?

So, it's not "WHEN you finally retire to Thailand" but "IF you finally retire to Thailand"...

1. I added a post that baff posted and i thought it relevant.

2. are you Thai?? have you ever been a forigner in any western country?

do you know what its like to be a thai in forign country?

do you know that thais need apply for visa for nearly every western country and go through a regorous examination?

While on the other hand forigners just arrive in thailand and walk of to a 30 day tourist Visa wich they very easily extend.

some of them make a living from extending it all the time and never go back.

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

how many westerners living in the western countries take the time to explore and be intrested in how their forigners and aliens are treated??

many westerners coming to live in thailand have a culture shock when for the first time in their life they realy feel what its like to be a "forigner" to be different and to have less rights then the locals.

and not so small number of posters here are still not addapting to it....so they spend time on TV posting anit thai posts that are all about why thailand is not like the western countries the came from and feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and that in general the thai need to bow down and thank them for coming here to improve them....

to those posters I say...asuming you have a choice.... go somehwere elsse.

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

[OlRedEyes]

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

When I finally retire to Thailand with my Thai wife I know that I will have to comply with the rules to be allowed to stay.

Going by your own reasoning displayed here and even better in other threads (where you have clearly stated that even having a Thai wife shouldn't entitle you to anything): who says you have any right at all to be allowed to retire in Thailand?

So, it's not "WHEN you finally retire to Thailand" but "IF you finally retire to Thailand"...

1. I added a post that baff posted and i thought it relevant.

2. are you Thai?? have you ever been a forigner in any western country?

do you know what its like to be a thai in forign country?

do you know that thais need apply for visa for nearly every western country and go through a regorous examination?

While on the other hand forigners just arrive in thailand and walk of to a 30 day tourist Visa wich they very easily extend.

some of them make a living from extending it all the time and never go back.

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

how many westerners living in the western countries take the time to explore and be intrested in how their forigners and aliens are treated??

many westerners coming to live in thailand have a culture shock when for the first time in their life they realy feel what its like to be a "forigner" to be different and to have less rights then the locals.

and not so small number of posters here are still not addapting to it....so they spend time on TV posting anit thai posts that are all about why thailand is not like the western countries the came from and feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and that in general the thai need to bow down and thank them for coming here to improve them....

to those posters I say...asuming you have a choice.... go somehwere elsse.

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

What utter hogwash.

And,

If Thai want to isolate themselves from the world they can do whatever they want to do in Thailand, within limits.

But if they want to trade, emigrate, tour or set up business and buy property in other countries they'd better reciprocate with at least similar rights to foreigners, else said foreigners have a right to say and do something about it.

You have a very narrow and blinkered approach to the world...

[highdiver]

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

What does this have to do with FBA

First, many if not most foreign governments allow Thai and other foreign nationals to open businesses with few restrictions. Despite the statements by some in the government, Thais who open business abroad are treated in the same manner as any other business including businesses owned by nationals of the other country. Thais are not required to take nationals of the other country as majority partners in their business as is the case here. Thais can own 100% of the business they invest in. Then there is the law. The law in the other countries generally protects the interest of the minority partners or shareholders including Thai nationals should they choose that arrangement. The law in other countries generally ignores nationality when deciding cases including those where a national of that country is involved in litigation with a foreigner. In fact, in many countries there are commissions that exist specifically to protect minority rights including the rights of foreign nationals visiting or residing in that country. These commissions take an active role in protecting the rights of foreign nationals by prosecuting business but sometimes individuals or local governments who violate equal opportunity or equal protection laws. Not so in Thailand. Rarely does a court in Thailand protect a foreigner when he is involved in litigation against a Thai. William Monson is a good example of that. Over 20 years and his case still is not resolved. I guess they are waiting for him to die of old age. There are thousands of other foreigners you have never heard of who, like Monson, have lost money investing in minority shares of a Thai small business. And yet the government complains that foreigners cheat Thais and use that to justify the present system. Once the money is invested the foreigner has no say whatever. Its like a charitable contribution except it wasn't given intentionally. The foreigner has not rights to object if the Thai partner decides to award himself a new and improved salary along with expensive perks. That would be interfering with the right of the Thai to exclusively manage and control the business. The foreigner sees his investment and knowledge contribution dissappear whithout recourse. The exception to that is listed firms where there are some protections for minority investors. Then there is the matter of housing and land. In the countries where many foreigners with small businesses in Thailand come from Thais and other foreign nationals are allowed to buy and own houses and land. In some instancs there may be restrictions on th eamount of land they can own but often the upper limit when it exists is large. In one instance I recall where there was a restriction 300+ acres or over 700 rai can be owned by foreign nationals. Contrast that with the land laws of Thailand.

That is largely what such comments have to do with the FBA. The FBA's intent is to further restrict or eliminate foreign competition. At the same time the government is encouraging Thais to open business abroad. A recent article talked about the opportunities in Vietnam and emphasised the fact that Thais can open businesses there without local partners and thus own and control the company. Yet Thailand is not willing to offer reciprocity to citizens of countries who treat her citizens well. I suspect those pushing the FBA would scream loud and long if other countries suddenly decided to retroactively require Thais to sell all but a minority interest to a national of the country where they had set up businesses. They would scream even louder if Thais were foreced to sell thier home and land holdings abroad. In fact I would expect protests to be organized against the embassy of any country that might do so. Such is life in LOS.

good post

however... in most wesern countries to open a business you must first apply for a visa and declare your investment prior getting permission to do it.

in most western countries forigners must apply to open a business and have some restrictions such capital requirements and few restrictions

In most western countries opening a business requires a business visa and forigneres are required to have it inorder to open a business.

in some countries this is controled by a forign investment office that actually help the investor to do it within the law.

in thailand forign investors can do the same. go trough the BOI. and get all the privliges. including 100% share controll, land ownership and even residency.

The FBA is not applicable when you go through the BOI.

the intent of recruiting forign investment is not designated for forigners coming to thailand to open a bar. it was not designated fo forigners coming to leave cheaply in thailand.

i dont think the Vietenam govermant will be happy to see Thai investors opening a noodle shop in Hannoi..

I agree with you how ever that in many cases for a small time investor wanting to open up a samll business in thailand inot through the BOI its very hard and not Fair...

[highdiver]

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

When I finally retire to Thailand with my Thai wife I know that I will have to comply with the rules to be allowed to stay.

Going by your own reasoning displayed here and even better in other threads (where you have clearly stated that even having a Thai wife shouldn't entitle you to anything): who says you have any right at all to be allowed to retire in Thailand?

So, it's not "WHEN you finally retire to Thailand" but "IF you finally retire to Thailand"...

1. I added a post that baff posted and i thought it relevant.

2. are you Thai?? have you ever been a forigner in any western country?

do you know what its like to be a thai in forign country?

do you know that thais need apply for visa for nearly every western country and go through a regorous examination?

While on the other hand forigners just arrive in thailand and walk of to a 30 day tourist Visa wich they very easily extend.

some of them make a living from extending it all the time and never go back.

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

how many westerners living in the western countries take the time to explore and be intrested in how their forigners and aliens are treated??

many westerners coming to live in thailand have a culture shock when for the first time in their life they realy feel what its like to be a "forigner" to be different and to have less rights then the locals.

and not so small number of posters here are still not addapting to it....so they spend time on TV posting anit thai posts that are all about why thailand is not like the western countries the came from and feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and that in general the thai need to bow down and thank them for coming here to improve them....

to those posters I say...asuming you have a choice.... go somehwere elsse.

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

What utter hogwash.

And,

If Thai want to isolate themselves from the world they can do whatever they want to do in Thailand, within limits.

yes they can its their country. and you are a guest. when you dont likke it you can allways leave.

But if they want to trade, emigrate, tour or set up business and buy property in other countries they'd better reciprocate with at least similar rights to foreigners, else said foreigners have a right to say and do something about it.

so when other countries set a minimum capital to forigners wishing to do business its ok.. but thailand is not allowed to do it?

forigneres are allowed to enter thailand on VOA but thai need to apply for a pre arrival visa.

You have a very narrow and blinkered approach to the world...

on the contrary its you who feels that everything has to be done your way or ellse.

[Supaporn]

Good save - for them. Good comments by you. But I am fairly sure that they were not posting with these thoughts in mind. Rather, I think they enjoy throwing darts at and disparaging each other for their particular views. Seems to be the norm from what I have seen on this site. Sad - but to each their own.

What does this have to do with FBA

First, many if not most foreign governments allow Thai and other foreign nationals to open businesses with few restrictions. Despite the statements by some in the government, Thais who open business abroad are treated in the same manner as any other business including businesses owned by nationals of the other country. Thais are not required to take nationals of the other country as majority partners in their business as is the case here. Thais can own 100% of the business they invest in. Then there is the law. The law in the other countries generally protects the interest of the minority partners or shareholders including Thai nationals should they choose that arrangement. The law in other countries generally ignores nationality when deciding cases including those where a national of that country is involved in litigation with a foreigner. In fact, in many countries there are commissions that exist specifically to protect minority rights including the rights of foreign nationals visiting or residing in that country. These commissions take an active role in protecting the rights of foreign nationals by prosecuting business but sometimes individuals or local governments who violate equal opportunity or equal protection laws. Not so in Thailand. Rarely does a court in Thailand protect a foreigner when he is involved in litigation against a Thai. William Monson is a good example of that. Over 20 years and his case still is not resolved. I guess they are waiting for him to die of old age. There are thousands of other foreigners you have never heard of who, like Monson, have lost money investing in minority shares of a Thai small business. And yet the government complains that foreigners cheat Thais and use that to justify the present system. Once the money is invested the foreigner has no say whatever. Its like a charitable contribution except it wasn't given intentionally. The foreigner has not rights to object if the Thai partner decides to award himself a new and improved salary along with expensive perks. That would be interfering with the right of the Thai to exclusively manage and control the business. The foreigner sees his investment and knowledge contribution dissappear whithout recourse. The exception to that is listed firms where there are some protections for minority investors. Then there is the matter of housing and land. In the countries where many foreigners with small businesses in Thailand come from Thais and other foreign nationals are allowed to buy and own houses and land. In some instancs there may be restrictions on th eamount of land they can own but often the upper limit when it exists is large. In one instance I recall where there was a restriction 300+ acres or over 700 rai can be owned by foreign nationals. Contrast that with the land laws of Thailand.

That is largely what such comments have to do with the FBA. The FBA's intent is to further restrict or eliminate foreign competition. At the same time the government is encouraging Thais to open business abroad. A recent article talked about the opportunities in Vietnam and emphasised the fact that Thais can open businesses there without local partners and thus own and control the company. Yet Thailand is not willing to offer reciprocity to citizens of countries who treat her citizens well. I suspect those pushing the FBA would scream loud and long if other countries suddenly decided to retroactively require Thais to sell all but a minority interest to a national of the country where they had set up businesses. They would scream even louder if Thais were foreced to sell thier home and land holdings abroad. In fact I would expect protests to be organized against the embassy of any country that might do so. Such is life in LOS.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

Typical highdiver response.

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

When I finally retire to Thailand with my Thai wife I know that I will have to comply with the rules to be allowed to stay.

Going by your own reasoning displayed here and even better in other threads (where you have clearly stated that even having a Thai wife shouldn't entitle you to anything): who says you have any right at all to be allowed to retire in Thailand?

So, it's not "WHEN you finally retire to Thailand" but "IF you finally retire to Thailand"...

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

I can't speak about Europe at this time but in the US it is usually catch and release unless they are picked up by the immigration servce. In that instance it is immigration detention until their court hearing and then likely deportation. Of course in the US there are the immigrant rights groups who provide free legal services for illegal immigrants and sometimes secure permanent residence. Contrast that with Thailand. Thailand's definition of work is so broad a tourist's breathing could in theory be used as the basis of a charge of illegal work. The Thai legal definition of work from the Tillke and Gibbins website, "working by exerting one's physical energy or employing one's knowledge, whether or not for wages of other benefits." ( http://tinyurl.com/38f2n3 ). Even thinking without a work permit is technically illegal in Thailand. Then there is the matter of what happens upon conviction, a fine and a jail term before deportation. Not so in the US unless the illegal immigrant has committed other crimes. They are simply sent home.

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

how many westerners living in the western countries take the time to explore and be intrested in how their forigners and aliens are treated??

In the US countless news reporters regularly explore those very issues. Not so in Thailand. A link to a recent article on Thais follows.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-th...=la-home-center

many westerners coming to live in thailand have a culture shock when for the first time in their life they realy feel what its like to be a "forigner" to be different and to have less rights then the locals.

and not so small number of posters here are still not addapting to it....so they spend time on TV posting anit thai posts that are all about why thailand is not like the western countries the came from and feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and that in general the thai need to bow down and thank them for coming here to improve them....

to those posters I say...asuming you have a choice.... go somehwere elsse.

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

Typical highdiver.

[highdiver]

Typical highdiver response.

The one thing I find strange is the small number of posters who appear on this forum who clearly feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and it is outrageous that the Thai authorities have the temerity to introduce any restrictions on a farang's right to do whatever he ###### well wants.

No, there is a growing and not so small number of posters who are coming to realize how deeply wrong and unfair is the huge disparity between the way Thais are being treated in their homecountries and the way they are being treated in Thailand...

When I finally retire to Thailand with my Thai wife I know that I will have to comply with the rules to be allowed to stay.

Going by your own reasoning displayed here and even better in other threads (where you have clearly stated that even having a Thai wife shouldn't entitle you to anything): who says you have any right at all to be allowed to retire in Thailand?

So, it's not "WHEN you finally retire to Thailand" but "IF you finally retire to Thailand"...

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

I can't speak about Europe at this time but in the US it is usually catch and release unless they are picked up by the immigration servce. In that instance it is immigration detention until their court hearing and then likely deportation. Of course in the US there are the immigrant rights groups who provide free legal services for illegal immigrants and sometimes secure permanent residence. Contrast that with Thailand. Thailand's definition of work is so broad a tourist's breathing could in theory be used as the basis of a charge of illegal work. The Thai legal definition of work from the Tillke and Gibbins website, "working by exerting one's physical energy or employing one's knowledge, whether or not for wages of other benefits." ( http://tinyurl.com/38f2n3 ). Even thinking without a work permit is technically illegal in Thailand. Then there is the matter of what happens upon conviction, a fine and a jail term before deportation. Not so in the US unless the illegal immigrant has committed other crimes. They are simply sent home.

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

how many westerners living in the western countries take the time to explore and be intrested in how their forigners and aliens are treated??

In the US countless news reporters regularly explore those very issues. Not so in Thailand. A link to a recent article on Thais follows.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-th...=la-home-center

many westerners coming to live in thailand have a culture shock when for the first time in their life they realy feel what its like to be a "forigner" to be different and to have less rights then the locals.

and not so small number of posters here are still not addapting to it....so they spend time on TV posting anit thai posts that are all about why thailand is not like the western countries the came from and feel that since they wish to live in Thailand they should be able to do so on their own terms and that in general the thai need to bow down and thank them for coming here to improve them....

to those posters I say...asuming you have a choice.... go somehwere elsse.

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

Typical highdiver.

there is no need to make it personal.. it does not serve you I or the debate.

the US has its own needs (mainly getting money to cover it huge debts)and thus its own defintions for forign investment restriction.

you can not set up a business in the US fi you dont have an approved business or investment visa prior to your arrival.

thailand is allowd to do the same. it seesm that they are aiming for large scale investors going through the BOI and not small time investors opening a small business.

I dont know if its good or bad economicly but they have a right to do it.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

there is no need to make it personal.. it does not serve you I or the debate.

the US has its own needs (mainly getting money to cover it huge debts)and thus its own defintions for forign investment restriction.

you can not set up a business in the US fi you dont have an approved business or investment visa prior to your arrival.

thailand is allowd to do the same. it seesm that they are aiming for large scale investors going through the BOI and not small time investors opening a small business.

I dont know if its good or bad economicly but they have a right to do it.

What Thailand is doing is not the reciprocity the country agreed to by treaty with the US. Thais are treated well. Americans while treated well by The Commerce Ministry are treated as if the treaty does not exist by the Ministry of Labor. In fact to my knowledge the Ministry of Labor has never acknowledged any obligation under the treaty and has adopted rules to circumvent it's protections and guarantees despite the fact the treaty was between the national governments of both countries. Don't beleve me? Walk into any Ministry of Labor office and ask if their rules are supposed to comply with the treaty.

Edited August 15, 2007 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[highdiver]

there is no need to make it personal.. it does not serve you I or the debate.

the US has its own needs (mainly getting money to cover it huge debts)and thus its own defintions for forign investment restriction.

you can not set up a business in the US fi you dont have an approved business or investment visa prior to your arrival.

thailand is allowd to do the same. it seesm that they are aiming for large scale investors going through the BOI and not small time investors opening a small business.

I dont know if its good or bad economicly but they have a right to do it.

What Thailand is doing is not the reciprocity the country agreed to by treaty with the US. Thais are treated well. Americans while treated well by The Commerce Ministry are treated as if the treaty does not exist by the Ministry of Labor. In fact to my knowledge the Ministry of Labor has never acknowledged any obligation under the treaty and has adopted rules to circumvent it's protections and guarantees despite the fact the treaty was between the national governments of both countries. Don't beleve me? Walk into any Ministry of Labor office and ask if their rules are supposed to comply with the treaty.

I have 2 american friends who are invested through the BOI in Thailand. both are very happy with the terms and the benfits.

I am not aware of this breech of the Amenity by the labour department. what does the treaty say about labour?

[otton]

2. are you Thai?? have you ever been a forigner in any western country?

do you know what its like to be a thai in forign country?

do you know that thais need apply for visa for nearly every western country and go through a regorous examination?

While on the other hand forigners just arrive in thailand and walk of to a 30 day tourist Visa wich they very easily extend.

some of them make a living from extending it all the time and never go back.

have you ever considered what happens to a thai cought in europe or america working with out a visa or a work permit?

have you ever considered what a thai feels about this issue of deeply wrong and unfair, huge disparity when they are in a western country???

There is a whole thread in the General section completely dedicated to this: "Spin Off From "story Of My Thai Citizenship Application" Thread, RE "tough" Western visas and "easy" Thai visas...". You have posted there these same questions, got your answers, shut up and went away with the tail between the legs...

3. thailand has retirement laws and if they decide they dont want forigenrs then you have to repsect that. you may not like it, you may not approve of that. but it Thailand. Thai- land...

you understand..... its land of the Thais so do what the law says or go back to your own country.

That's exactly what I said: contrary to the West, having a Thai wife entitle you to nothing so you and your wife should keep that in mind while making plans for your retirement and considering the ever changing and worsening requirements you are required to meet.

There is no guarantee you will keep getting that 1 year extension...

[Arkady]

I criticize when I think ordinary Thais, including my friends and students, are being cheated and ripped off or denied a better future. Its got nothing to do with superiority or inferiority. I'd do exactly the same in Australia. Its called democracy and free speech. Don't you think lots of Thais are also criticizing? Of course they are. Thats why the current regime is so jumpy.

Highdiver's approach of telling us to that we have no right to express opinions because we are farangs who can go home if we don't like it is unfortunately just the tip of the iceberg of the elitists' approach to freedom of speech in general. They are in fact far more interested in stifling freedom of expression and access to information amongst their fellow Thais than foreigners. This is true of both elite camps: the corrupt Chinese gangster/politicians who buy votes and pull the wool over the eyes of the rural poor; and the military group who believe they have a natural right to a seat at the trough, to be at the top of the social pile and to direct things behind the scenes. Both of the last two coups had a lot to do with the military being nudged away from the trough by super corrupt gangster/politicians. Freedom of expression got better for a couple of years under the second Chuan government but the Thaksin government's systematic erosion of media freedom and the junta's efforts to prevent free speech have taken things to a pathetic state. The thousands of websites now blocked in Thailand make it look like a communist country. The fine words about equality for all regardless of race, gender or religion and the people's ownership of state media in the 1997 constitution turned out just to be a sick joke and now even that's gone.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

I have 2 american friends who are invested through the BOI in Thailand. both are very happy with the terms and the benfits.

I am not aware of this breech of the Amenity by the labour department. what does the treaty say about labour?

BOI privileges are separate from those of the Treaty of Amity though an American owned business can apply for both. The sections of the treaty that relate to the owner managing, controlling and doing other things necessary for the business follows.

From Article 4 of the treaty:

l. Nationals and companies of either Party shall be accorded national treatment with respect to establishing, as well as acquiring interests in, enterprises of all types for engaging in commercial, industrial, financial and other business activities within the territories of the other Party. 4. Enterprises which are or may hereafter be established or acquired by nationals and companies of either Party within the territories of the other Party and which are owned or controlled by such nationals and companies, whether in the form of individual proprietorships, direct branches or companies constituted under the laws of such other Party, shall be permitted freely to conduct their activities therein upon terms no less favorable than like enterprises owned or controlled by nationals of such other Party or of any third country. 5. Nationals and companies of either Party shall enjoy the right to control and manage the enterprises which they have established or acquired within the territories of the other Party, and shall be permitted without discrimination to do all things normally found necessary and proper to the effective conduct of enterprises engaged in like activities. 6. Nationals and companies of either Party shall be permitted, in accordance with the applicable laws, to engage, within the territories of the other Party, accountants or other technical experts, executive personnel, attorneys, agents and other specialists of their choice. Moreover, such nationals and companies shall be permitted to engage accountants and other technical experts, regardless of the extent to which they may have qualified for the practice of a profession within the territories of such other Party, for the particular purpose of making examinations, audits and technical investigations for internal purposes exclusively for, and rendering reports to, such nationals and companies in connection with the planning and operation of their enterprises within such territories.

Particularly, the Ministry of Labor's position as it was explained to me by one of their employees does not recognize the right of American owner or his appointee of the same nationality "to control and manage the enterprises which they have established or acquired within the territories of the other Party,and without discrimination do all things normally found necessary and proper to the effective conduct of enterprises engaged in like activities."

Edited August 15, 2007 by ChiangMaiAmerican

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

Another point regarding your statements on how immigrants are treated in America. The Thai Town article I linked mentioned the El Monte sweat shop incident. I was familar with that incident however I did not know until today that the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC now has an exhibit related to sweat shops in general and that incident in particular. The workers were illegal aliens yet US law still protected them.

From the Smithsonian Institute:

"On August 2, 1995, a multi-agency task force led by the California Department of Industrial Relations raided a fenced seven-unit apartment complex in El Monte, California, a small community near Los Angeles. What they found was one of the most horrendous U.S. sweatshops in modern times. Law enforcement officers arrested eight operators of a Chinese-Thai, family-owned garment sweatshop and freed 72 illegal Thai immigrants. The workers, most of them women, had been held in virtual slavery behind fences tipped with razor wire and forced to sew garments in conditions significantly worse than those found in most sweatshops."

http://americanhistory.si.edu/sweatshops/elmonte/elmonte.htm

Despite the fact the Thai workers were illegal aliens and subject to deportation, the US allowed them to remain and issued them visas.

From the Smithsonian Institute:

"Celebration of first day of freedom, Griffith Park, Los Angeles, August 13, 1995

After the raid, the workers were held in custody awaiting deportation. Nine days later, they were released as material witnesses pending trial of the sweatshop operators. Concerned for the workers' safety if returned to Thailand, the federal government granted them legal residency with the right to work in the United States. All expect to apply for citizenship after residency requirements have been met. "Since being set free from El Monte I was able to experience a good side of America. So now I have come to see there are good aspects to this country. . . . I believe this country is truly a land of freedom . . ."

-- Praphapan Pongpid, El Monte sweatshop worker, 1996"

http://americanhistory.si.edu/sweatshops/elmonte/3t16.htm

[dog412]

by this time, if certain Thais cannot see the difference between U.S. immigration concerning their people and the Thai concerning ours, then nothing would convince them, unless the U.S gave them equal reciprocal treatment.

[Bruce1]

All I'll add is its a lot easier to be a Thai in Australian than to be an Australian in Thailand.

[highdiver]

ChiangMaiAmerican

you got me realy intersted in this so i went to llok for information.

I have found the following please correct it where aplicable.

Background

In 1966 Thailand and the US entered into the Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations (the Treaty of Amity) to promote friendly relations between them and to encourage mutually beneficial trade and closer economic and cultural ties between their peoples.

Under the Treaty of Amity, American nationals, either natural or juristic persons, can conduct business in Thailand on the same basis as Thai nationals, except for six reserved activities, namely (i) communications; (ii) transportation; (iii) fiduciary functions; (iv) banking involving depository functions; (v) exploitation of land or other natural resources; and (vi) domestic trade in indigenous agricultural products.

The Treaty of Amity states that it will remain in force for 10 years and continue to be in force thereafter until terminated by one years written notice. It is reviewed every 10 years.

The existing privileges given to American nationals, under the Treaty of Amity are greater than those extended to other foreign nationals. This is in violation of the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) which requires member nations to extend most favored nation treatment (MFN Treatment) equally to every WTO member. Until now, however, the Treaty of Amity has been valid because in 1995 Thailand requested temporary exemption from MFN Treatment for 10 years. The exemption period will expire on 1 January 2005. By the end of this year, therefore, Thailand must develop WTO compliant strategies, which will also benefit Thailands trading relationships.

Present

In compliance with WTO rules, Thailand stated that the Treaty of Amity will not be renewed. However, the existing privileges given to American nationals will instead be included in a new bilateral trade agreement, the Thailand-US Free Trade Agreement (Thai-US FTA). Under the Thai-US FTA, it is probable that existing privileges will be extended still further, particularly in the services sector. Under WTO rules, all privileges must now be extended to all WTO members, creating a real dilemma for Thailand. Beyond services, the Thai-US FTA will cover trade, investment and intellectual property protection.

In 2002 Thailand and the US entered into a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) in order to facilitate and liberalize trade and investment between them. The TIFA is the fundamental stepping stone to the Thai-US FTA. Nevertheless, negotiations on the Thai-US FTA have not yet been officially finished

It was however, expected that negotiations will be concluded in the middle of 2005.

in December 2005 the Amity was not renewd and the new FTA agreemnet has not yet been signed.

The model for the Thai-US FTA agreement is the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the first free trade agreement between the United States and an Asian nation.

makes an interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...Trade_Agreement

so according to this the Amity that is in violation of WTO is no longer valid. hence the thai goverment or the labour department are not violating an amity that does not exist anymore.

true or false??

[Sanpatong]

All I'll add is its a lot easier to be a Thai in Australian than to be an Australian in Thailand.

Seriously?

If I was Thai there's absolutely no way I could manage to live in Europe. (Unless I was really very rich, like Thaksin. For UK people, "money number one", I guess.)

Edited August 15, 2007 by Sanpatong

[nick2k]

All I'll add is its a lot easier to be a Thai in Australian than to be an Australian in Thailand.

Seriously?

If I was Thai there's absolutely no way I could manage to live in Europe. (Unless I was really very rich, like Thaksin. For UK people, "money number one", I guess.)

australia is not in europe.

anyway, it used to be easy to live in usa. so easy, many illegal immigrant go there. but pretty soon, this will all change. we americans don't want illegal immigrants living in america. legal ok, but not illegal.

[chinthee]

All I'll add is its a lot easier to be a Thai in Australian than to be an Australian in Thailand.

Seriously?

If I was Thai there's absolutely no way I could manage to live in Europe. (Unless I was really very rich, like Thaksin. For UK people, "money number one", I guess.)

australia is not in europe.

anyway, it used to be easy to live in usa. so easy, many illegal immigrant go there. but pretty soon, this will all change. we americans don't want illegal immigrants living in america. legal ok, but not illegal.

This is already a HUGE mess of a debate and subject of reform in the US now, primarily regarding Mexican illegal aliens and what to do with the big numbers of illegals currently in the country. Lots of impassioned view on both sides. But, the issue is mostly about poor illegals coming into America to perform jobs most Americans don't want to do, and then the subsequent burden on society when those illegals turn into families with health, crime and other problems.

The Thailand issue is not that, they know how to deal with Burmese. We're talking about inward investors with money here, not laborers.

[highdiver]

Another point regarding your statements on how immigrants are treated in America. The Thai Town article I linked mentioned the El Monte sweat shop incident. I was familar with that incident however I did not know until today that the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC now has an exhibit related to sweat shops in general and that incident in particular. The workers were illegal aliens yet US law still protected them.

From the Smithsonian Institute:

"On August 2, 1995, a multi-agency task force led by the California Department of Industrial Relations raided a fenced seven-unit apartment complex in El Monte, California, a small community near Los Angeles. What they found was one of the most horrendous U.S. sweatshops in modern times. Law enforcement officers arrested eight operators of a Chinese-Thai, family-owned garment sweatshop and freed 72 illegal Thai immigrants. The workers, most of them women, had been held in virtual slavery behind fences tipped with razor wire and forced to sew garments in conditions significantly worse than those found in most sweatshops."

http://americanhistory.si.edu/sweatshops/elmonte/elmonte.htm

Despite the fact the Thai workers were illegal aliens and subject to deportation, the US allowed them to remain and issued them visas.

From the Smithsonian Institute:

"Celebration of first day of freedom, Griffith Park, Los Angeles, August 13, 1995

After the raid, the workers were held in custody awaiting deportation. Nine days later, they were released as material witnesses pending trial of the sweatshop operators. Concerned for the workers' safety if returned to Thailand, the federal government granted them legal residency with the right to work in the United States. All expect to apply for citizenship after residency requirements have been met. "Since being set free from El Monte I was able to experience a good side of America. So now I have come to see there are good aspects to this country. . . . I believe this country is truly a land of freedom . . ."

-- Praphapan Pongpid, El Monte sweatshop worker, 1996"

http://americanhistory.si.edu/sweatshops/elmonte/3t16.htm

that is great that USA has done that. it is indeed a great country.

as we are disucssing the realtions of thailand with the west. I am sorry i cannot give you an example of a similler cases in thailand as it never had sweat shops where western forigners were working ileagaly. I never heard of a police busting a sweat shop and finding Americans working in slave conditions and maybe thats why you don see it in local media.

however Thailand dos have its ileagal migrants mainly from Burma and they deport them back as any country does with ileagal migrants.

As for assiting them or attempting to preserve human rights of the migrants. Thailand to has NGO and there is one right in your city its called MAP Migrant Assistant Programme.

www.mapfoundationcm.org/Eng/map.html

[Arkady]

ChiangMaiAmerican

you got me realy intersted in this so i went to llok for information.

I have found the following please correct it where aplicable.

Background

In 1966 Thailand and the US entered into the Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations (the “Treaty of Amity”) to promote friendly relations between them and to encourage mutually beneficial trade and closer economic and cultural ties between their peoples.

Under the Treaty of Amity, American nationals, either natural or juristic persons, can conduct business in Thailand on the same basis as Thai nationals, except for six reserved activities, namely (i) communications; (ii) transportation; (iii) fiduciary functions; (iv) banking involving depository functions; (v) exploitation of land or other natural resources; and (vi) domestic trade in indigenous agricultural products.

The Treaty of Amity states that it will remain in force for 10 years and continue to be in force thereafter until terminated by one year’s written notice. It is reviewed every 10 years.

The existing privileges given to American nationals, under the Treaty of Amity are greater than those extended to other foreign nationals. This is in violation of the rules of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) which requires member nations to extend most favored nation treatment (“MFN Treatment”) equally to every WTO member. Until now, however, the Treaty of Amity has been valid because in 1995 Thailand requested temporary exemption from MFN Treatment for 10 years. The exemption period will expire on 1 January 2005. By the end of this year, therefore, Thailand must develop WTO compliant strategies, which will also benefit Thailand’s trading relationships.

Present

In compliance with WTO rules, Thailand stated that the Treaty of Amity will not be renewed. However, the existing privileges given to American nationals will instead be included in a new bilateral trade agreement, the Thailand-US Free Trade Agreement (“Thai-US FTA”). Under the Thai-US FTA, it is probable that existing privileges will be extended still further, particularly in the services sector. Under WTO rules, all privileges must now be extended to all WTO members, creating a real dilemma for Thailand. Beyond services, the Thai-US FTA will cover trade, investment and intellectual property protection.

In 2002 Thailand and the US entered into a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (“TIFA”) in order to facilitate and liberalize trade and investment between them. The TIFA is the fundamental stepping stone to the Thai-US FTA. Nevertheless, negotiations on the Thai-US FTA have not yet been officially finished

It was however, expected that negotiations will be concluded in the middle of 2005.

in December 2005 the Amity was not renewd and the new FTA agreemnet has not yet been signed.

The model for the Thai-US FTA agreement is the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the first free trade agreement between the United States and an Asian nation.

makes an interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...Trade_Agreement

so according to this the Amity that is in violation of WTO is no longer valid. hence the thai goverment or the labour department are not violating an amity that does not exist anymore.

true or false??

It is true that, since the expiry of the MFN (most favoured nation provision) in Jan 2005, the Treaty of Amity has been in violation of Thailand's WTO commitments but it is not true that the treaty no longer exists. It can only be terminated if either side gives one year's notice in writing. So far neither side has given notice, so it continues to be in force despite the WTO violation. Other WTO member states are now entitled to take action with the WTO to sue Thailand for compensation for their companies on the basis that they have not been granted equal status with Americans. I believe that they have been hanging fire on this issue waiting to see what happened with the FBA amendments. The FBA amendments would also put Thailand in breach of its WTO commitments, as members are under an obligation to consult other members before enacting legislation that significantly restricts free access to trade in services. The US would probably be willing to join in a case seeking compensation for the amendments even though they have the treaty. Americans still don't have access to financial services or Annex 1 and 2 activities under the treaty and there is a lot of red tape and general Thai government ill will and obstruction towards treaty companies. Thus the Americans would rather work for general liberalization to the benefit of all WTO members rather than cling to the treaty, while the other WTO countries don't see any benefit in giving Thailand an excuse to unilaterally terminate the treaty by challenging it at the WTO.

The WTO's reasoning behind granting the 10 year MFN was obviously that 10 years should be long enough for Thailand to reform its foreign investment laws so that all WTO member countries' rights in Thailand would at least as good the rights the US has under the treaty. so that the treaty would no longer be needed. Unfortunately they didn't count on the stubborn recidivist nature of the Thai vested interests that would rather have a bigger share of a shrinking pie that is only big enough to feed themselves than a slightly smaller share of a growing pie that will be big enough to feed every one. Their good friends in Burma provide their role model.

[Gravelrash]

Went to see my lawyer today about renewing my work permit through my company. They asked me in as they say there have been some changes (or enforcement) of regulations, in my case effectively that the company needed to be making more money. My company is in real estate, and yes, business is woeful, hence less income. I still carry more staff than what I need which also doesn't help, but I always knew those minimum numbers (at one stage we exceeded that quota).

I do have options to keep things running, but will entail more expense, currently looking at just closing it down and changing to another visa category which I can do. The lawyer said that another Japanese company had also elected to close up rather than battle through the regulations. They also indicated they are expecting quite a lot of their foreign clients would be having problems with work permits soon, and are looking at ways to resolve that. Another one is that foreigners starting new companies will also be facing some new regulations, FBA or not.

The impression I got was that the lawyer was not entirely happy as they deal with many foreigners, they also agreed that it isn't that the powers that be don't know what they are doing (as cited by some posts), but in fact know exactly what they are doing to achieve an end result.

I also was trying to get a herbal product from overseas approved through the FDA for another business. Although it sells in most countries without problem, after 8 months I still can't get it registered here. I have been advised it could be another 3 months before a decision is made. The person who advised that stated that the government doesn't really want foreign products entering and so was making it even more difficult (it always was any way!).

You can take those observations and comments from Thais as you will, they may or may not be correct, but one can't help but think the wind is changing. Fortunately in my case I can work or not, it is really for something to do, but my staff with their car and condo loans are not likely to be amused, as I did pay foreign commission rates to them and I know the other Thai companies around this area pay nowhere near that.

[xbusman]

Unfortunately I am in the same boat. The soaring baht has destroyed profits to a less than break even level. I have tried desperately hard to keep all the products in Thailand and the employees working but got hit with the visa problems just last month. Foolish of me really, Thailands exports are drying up, all my old vendors are closing their businesses and opening up in China, I should have been gone a year ago.

If I can get the visa and work permit for one more year, I will hang on hoping things change. If not, the winds are changing and old sailors know its easier to sail with the wind than against it.

[nick2k]

All I'll add is its a lot easier to be a Thai in Australian than to be an Australian in Thailand.

Seriously?

If I was Thai there's absolutely no way I could manage to live in Europe. (Unless I was really very rich, like Thaksin. For UK people, "money number one", I guess.)

australia is not in europe.

anyway, it used to be easy to live in usa. so easy, many illegal immigrant go there. but pretty soon, this will all change. we americans don't want illegal immigrants living in america. legal ok, but not illegal.

This is already a HUGE mess of a debate and subject of reform in the US now, primarily regarding Mexican illegal aliens and what to do with the big numbers of illegals currently in the country. Lots of impassioned view on both sides. But, the issue is mostly about poor illegals coming into America to perform jobs most Americans don't want to do, and then the subsequent burden on society when those illegals turn into families with health, crime and other problems.

The Thailand issue is not that, they know how to deal with Burmese. We're talking about inward investors with money here, not laborers.

sorry to be off topic...

but if you are an american, and are interested in teaming up with other americans who wish to get the illegals OUT of america, check out the following website - http://www.numbersusa.com

and the issue isn't about jobs that americans don't want to do. it is businesses wanting to pay cheaper wages lower than minimum wage. check out the above website for the TRUE story.

when we are done, we will get rid of the H1B visa too. we already stopped legislation to DOUBLE the number of H1B visas.

[Arkady]

Went to see my lawyer today about renewing my work permit through my company. They asked me in as they say there have been some changes (or enforcement) of regulations, in my case effectively that the company needed to be making more money. My company is in real estate, and yes, business is woeful, hence less income. I still carry more staff than what I need which also doesn't help, but I always knew those minimum numbers (at one stage we exceeded that quota).

I do have options to keep things running, but will entail more expense, currently looking at just closing it down and changing to another visa category which I can do. The lawyer said that another Japanese company had also elected to close up rather than battle through the regulations. They also indicated they are expecting quite a lot of their foreign clients would be having problems with work permits soon, and are looking at ways to resolve that. Another one is that foreigners starting new companies will also be facing some new regulations, FBA or not.

The impression I got was that the lawyer was not entirely happy as they deal with many foreigners, they also agreed that it isn't that the powers that be don't know what they are doing (as cited by some posts), but in fact know exactly what they are doing to achieve an end result.

I also was trying to get a herbal product from overseas approved through the FDA for another business. Although it sells in most countries without problem, after 8 months I still can't get it registered here. I have been advised it could be another 3 months before a decision is made. The person who advised that stated that the government doesn't really want foreign products entering and so was making it even more difficult (it always was any way!).

You can take those observations and comments from Thais as you will, they may or may not be correct, but one can't help but think the wind is changing. Fortunately in my case I can work or not, it is really for something to do, but my staff with their car and condo loans are not likely to be amused, as I did pay foreign commission rates to them and I know the other Thai companies around this area pay nowhere near that.

I remember a large Thai company having trouble renewing work permits for its foreign staff in 1998 because they had booked huge losses after the devaluation of baht. In fact they were still solvent but had decided to write off all bad loans and accounts receivables to clean up the balance sheet and start afresh. The foreign staff were essential for their main foreign client to continue putting business with them and they nearly lost this large chunk of business due to the stupidity of quite junior employees at the Immigration Dept who are given a lot of power to decide on such cases. They like to take the view that foreign staff are an unnecessary luxury that can easily be replaced by Thais and don't want to understand that the business often goes away with the foreign staff, causing Thai workers to lose their livelihoods. There is also an assumption that companies that report losses or low profits must be cheating on taxes. I don't really see what is the connection between profitability and work permits as long as the company is solvent. Are they really concerned that farangs will become a burden on the non-existent Thai social security system and demand free government housing, healthcare and education for their kids as they might be able to in our countries? Give us a break.

[highdiver]

ChiangMaiAmerican

you got me realy intersted in this so i went to llok for information.

I have found the following please correct it where aplicable.

Background

In 1966 Thailand and the US entered into the Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations (the “Treaty of Amity”) to promote friendly relations between them and to encourage mutually beneficial trade and closer economic and cultural ties between their peoples.

Under the Treaty of Amity, American nationals, either natural or juristic persons, can conduct business in Thailand on the same basis as Thai nationals, except for six reserved activities, namely (i) communications; (ii) transportation; (iii) fiduciary functions; (iv) banking involving depository functions; (v) exploitation of land or other natural resources; and (vi) domestic trade in indigenous agricultural products.

The Treaty of Amity states that it will remain in force for 10 years and continue to be in force thereafter until terminated by one year’s written notice. It is reviewed every 10 years.

The existing privileges given to American nationals, under the Treaty of Amity are greater than those extended to other foreign nationals. This is in violation of the rules of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) which requires member nations to extend most favored nation treatment (“MFN Treatment”) equally to every WTO member. Until now, however, the Treaty of Amity has been valid because in 1995 Thailand requested temporary exemption from MFN Treatment for 10 years. The exemption period will expire on 1 January 2005. By the end of this year, therefore, Thailand must develop WTO compliant strategies, which will also benefit Thailand’s trading relationships.

Present

In compliance with WTO rules, Thailand stated that the Treaty of Amity will not be renewed. However, the existing privileges given to American nationals will instead be included in a new bilateral trade agreement, the Thailand-US Free Trade Agreement (“Thai-US FTA”). Under the Thai-US FTA, it is probable that existing privileges will be extended still further, particularly in the services sector. Under WTO rules, all privileges must now be extended to all WTO members, creating a real dilemma for Thailand. Beyond services, the Thai-US FTA will cover trade, investment and intellectual property protection.

In 2002 Thailand and the US entered into a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (“TIFA”) in order to facilitate and liberalize trade and investment between them. The TIFA is the fundamental stepping stone to the Thai-US FTA. Nevertheless, negotiations on the Thai-US FTA have not yet been officially finished

It was however, expected that negotiations will be concluded in the middle of 2005.

in December 2005 the Amity was not renewd and the new FTA agreemnet has not yet been signed.

The model for the Thai-US FTA agreement is the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the first free trade agreement between the United States and an Asian nation.

makes an interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...Trade_Agreement

so according to this the Amity that is in violation of WTO is no longer valid. hence the thai goverment or the labour department are not violating an amity that does not exist anymore.

true or false??

It is true that, since the expiry of the MFN (most favoured nation provision) in Jan 2005, the Treaty of Amity has been in violation of Thailand's WTO commitments but it is not true that the treaty no longer exists. It can only be terminated if either side gives one year's notice in writing. So far neither side has given notice, so it continues to be in force despite the WTO violation. Other WTO member states are now entitled to take action with the WTO to sue Thailand for compensation for their companies on the basis that they have not been granted equal status with Americans. I believe that they have been hanging fire on this issue waiting to see what happened with the FBA amendments. The FBA amendments would also put Thailand in breach of its WTO commitments, as members are under an obligation to consult other members before enacting legislation that significantly restricts free access to trade in services. The US would probably be willing to join in a case seeking compensation for the amendments even though they have the treaty. Americans still don't have access to financial services or Annex 1 and 2 activities under the treaty and there is a lot of red tape and general Thai government ill will and obstruction towards treaty companies. Thus the Americans would rather work for general liberalization to the benefit of all WTO members rather than cling to the treaty, while the other WTO countries don't see any benefit in giving Thailand an excuse to unilaterally terminate the treaty by challenging it at the WTO.

The WTO's reasoning behind granting the 10 year MFN was obviously that 10 years should be long enough for Thailand to reform its foreign investment laws so that all WTO member countries' rights in Thailand would at least as good the rights the US has under the treaty. so that the treaty would no longer be needed. Unfortunately they didn't count on the stubborn recidivist nature of the Thai vested interests that would rather have a bigger share of a shrinking pie that is only big enough to feed themselves than a slightly smaller share of a growing pie that will be big enough to feed every one. Their good friends in Burma provide their role model.

thank you for the info.

it was my undesrstanding that the Amity needed to be extended every 10 years and that if any party wished to teminate within those 10 years they need to give a 2 year notice.

as the amity was not renewd again after the 10 years expires is it not terminated??

please elaborate if you can.

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

thank you for the info.

it was my undesrstanding that the Amity needed to be extended every 10 years and that if any party wished to teminate within those 10 years they need to give a 2 year notice.

as the amity was not renewd again after the 10 years expires is it not terminated??

please elaborate if you can.

According to the US Embassy and I have it in writing, the AER had been renewed on a month to month basis after the last one year extension expired awaiting conclusion of the FTA negotiations. Earlier this year the Thai government told the US the treaty would remain in force until further notice, again awaiting conclusion of the now stalled FTA negotiations. The negotiations are expected to resume once an elected government is in place. At present, Treaty business applications are still being process by both governments.