The Trump administration has suspended $1.3 billion worth of duty-free trade for certain Thai products.

In a letter to Vice President Mike Pence and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announcing the decision, Trump said Thailand had not been doing enough to protect worker rights, specifically those laid out in international trade agreements.

The suspension of duty-free status will affect nearly one-third of all Thai exports to the US.

The decision by Trump is yet another hit to Thailand’s export industry, which is already stagnating due to factors such as the strong Thai baht as well as the ongoing US-China trade war.

Thailand currently sits as the second biggest beneficiary of duty-free trades to the US behind India.

The total trade between the two countries totaled $44.5 billion in 2018.

Thailand business lawyers note that the country’s fishing industry could bear the biggest brunt of the suspension as it has already seen its seafood trade to Europe fall drastically in recent years due to multiple unethical practices in the industry that perturbed the EU.

A further hit to seafood exports going to the US could signal alarm bells in the industry.

Read the full story here.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision last week that state governments are constitutionally allowed to tax internet sales, even if the business has no property or employees in the state.

The decision, which overturns prior rulings that require a company to have a physical presence in the state before being subjected to taxes, paves the way for all 50 states to implement new taxes on goods and services sold on the internet.

As of right now, 31 states already have laws on the books that impose taxes on digital companies.

Surprisingly, the 5-4 decision was not split on partisan lines, as conservative judges Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, and Samuel Alito were joined by the liberal-leaning pair of Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Neil Gorsuch. The dissenters were John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.

Read the full story here.

Need a Thai business attorney? Contact the professional and experienced lawyers at Chaninat & Leeds.

Case involves around rock band that want to trademark its name

West face of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C.

The U.S Supreme Court on Thursday decided to review the federal law that bars registration of disparaging trademarks reports the Washington Post.

The justices announced that they will consider whether part of the 1946 Lanham Trademark Act violates the First Amendment in the case of a “Chinatown dance rock” band called The Slants whose registration to trademark their name was turned down by the U.S. Office of Patent and Trademark Office in 2011.

Siam Trademark Associates in Thailand specialize in registration and protection of copyright and trademarks in Thailand

According to Washington Post, “The patent office said the name was likely to disparage a significant number of Asian Americans.” However, the lead singer of the band, who had filed the registration, said that the point of the band’s name was the exact opposite: to reclaim a slur and use it “as a badge of pride.”

Read more here

Image :  West face of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. by UpstateNYer

The U.S. Patent Office has refused a trademark to “Redskins Hog Rinds” on the grounds that the name is a “derogatory slang,” reports Time.

The U.S. Patent Office said the name “ may disparage or bring into contempt or disrepute persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols.”

Thailand intellectual property law firm Chaninat & Leeds are comprised of Thai and western attorneys who are experts in this field

The Washington Redskins may be disappointed to hear the decision, as it may indicate that the Patent Office will also choose to revoke the trademark on the NFL team’s controversial name. In July 2014, a federal board canceled the team’s trademark registration — calling its nickname “disparaging to Native Americans.” Redskins owner Dan Snyder, has repeatedly said he would never change the name.

Read the full report here

The Bangkok Post has confirmed that the Thai Revenue Department has reached a tentative agreement with the US to assist them with enforcing the new FATCA act to prevent offshore tax evasion.   The intent behind FATCA is to keep US persons from hiding income and assets overseas.

Bangkok based Chaninat & Leeds are experienced Thailand company lawyers who act for businesses and organizations of all sizes 

The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act was introduced in the US in 2010 and, for enforcement measures, requires the cooperation of non-USA financial institutions to contribute information about US account holders. This also includes US citizens who reside outside of the USA.

By agreeing to assist the US in tax information sharing, Thailand would therefore help the US in gathering the information the USA needs to enforce FATCA with regard to US citizens holding assets outside of the USA.

HThe countries who have already agreed to share information with the US include Switzerland, the Cayman Islands and the Bahamas, all common choices for offshore bank accounts with US citizens.  However banks in many countries are prohibited from sharing account information with foreign governments due to local privacy laws.

Related Articles:

US Thailand Double Taxation Treaty

Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

U.S. Taxes and Tax Law: An Expat’s Bane?

As reported by the ‘The Nation’, activists have accused the US in their attempt to push through the Trans-Pacific Pact (TPP).

Thailand Attorney

Chaninat & Leeds – Recognized Experts in Thailand Law & International Law

The TPP highly controversial nature is due to the negotiations being held behind closed doors, in addition to the actual documents being kept secret. Should the deal be finalized and with the introduction of regulations impacting on company profits, the governments may potentially be at risk to be sued by corporations. This could also possibly affect laws that protect the public, such as accessibility to cheap medication or bans on logos of cigarette packets.

It has been suggested that the US in its attempt to push through the TPP are setting up invitation only meeting to discuss ‘difficult issues’.

Infosys, India’s second largest outsourcer, has reserved $35 million from its fund between July-September of the present financial year (FY14) to finance a legal case in the US on its alleged abuse of B-1 visas in the past reports Profit NDTV.

US immigration authorities issue B-1 visas for short-term visitors to be present at business seminars but limits them from undertaking paid employment during their stay.

Thailand Business Lawyer

Chaninat and Leeds are local and international business lawyers 

A district court in Texas served a legal notice May 23, 2011 on the alleged misuse of B-1 visa rules by Infosys, who say that any action by the US government would badly harm them in the North America market.

S B1 and B2 visas have becoming increasingly difficult for foreign nationals to acquire, including Thai nationals.  For all Thai Visitor B visa applicants, an interview at the US Embassy is required for those aged 14 – 79, without exception.

Read the full article here

Related Articles:

Waivers of US Visa Denials and Waivers in Thailand

US Immigration Visa Applications and Waivers of Inadmissibility

An increasing amount of US States seemingly believe that  international laws are having a negative impact on decisions from their courts reports the USA Today.

Last month, North Carolina was the seventh state to pass legislation barring judges from considering foreign law in their decisions. This includes sharia.

Thailand business law

Chaninat and Leeds are a Thailand law firm who specialize in local and international business law 

On closer inspection, it seems that many of the bills, including North Carolina’s, would only apply when the foreign law in question would violate a person’s constitutional rights, however debate rages on, with those in support proclaiming the move will protect American constitutional liberties, where as those against believe it will cause issue with international business and contract law. Admittedly,  the principle of private autonomy or the freedom to select foreign private laws is not exclusively applied to the law of contract but is also extended to other branches of legal transactions, such as matrimonial regimes between spouses, or tort law.

The Thailand Conflict of Laws Act recognizes the principle of party autonomy clearly embodied in article 13 paragraph one. It stipulates that: “The question as to what law is applicable in regard to the essential elements or effects of a contract is determines by the intention of the parties thereof.”Thai law acknowledges both expressed and inferred choice of law. This is also important for example with international prenuptial agreements. In this situation, Thailand lawyers advise it would be prudent for an affected individual to instruct a skilled international lawyer competent in the laws of both Thailand and western nations with practical experience in divorce litigation of both jurisdictions.

Related Video:

Related Articles:

Prenuptial Agreements: US Law, Thailand Law and EU Law Compared

International Prenuptial Agreements: Conflicts of Law in the United States

Choice of Law in Contract and Thai Private International Law: A Comparative Study

Some Theoretical Remarks on Thai Private International Law Compared to the Continental and the Common Law Traditions