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

April 5, 2013

Customs Arbitration for Disputes on Security Amount

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

When importers bring products into Thailand, the goods need to pass through customs formalities, during which officials will inspect the products to assess duties. Duties are determined based on the real market value of the product and all related taxes. This means that the amount of duty can vary in different circumstances, resulting in some importers disagreeing with the amount assessed.

When an importer disagrees with the amount of duty but needs to clear the goods from customs, the importer can post security with the Customs Department. But this does not provide a satisfactory option for many importers because the amount of security is equal to the duty assessed. Importantly, the security kept by the Customs Department will not be released until the amount of duty is settled.

This has been an ongoing problem for importers, who have often perceived the process as being unfairly tilted against them. But a recent notification from the Customs Department grants important new rights to importers who disagree with the amount of security required to clear their goods.

This has been an ongoing problem for importers, who have often perceived the process as being unfairly tilted against them. But a recent notification from the Customs Department grants important new rights to importers who disagree with the amount of security required to clear their goods.

Customs Department Notification 85/2555 is intended to be consistent with obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 and was issued under Section 3 and Section 12 of the Customs Act of 1926 and the Royal Decree on Rules and Procedures for Good Governance of 2003.

Under the Notification, if an issue arises relating to the amount of duty due to the value of the products, an importer or exporter has two options. First, they can ask the customs officials at the port of importation or exportation to issue a formal letter confirming the amount of security, after which they can submit a petition requesting reconsideration of this amount. In practice, though, importers or exporters will be unlikely to choose this approach, as their goods would then be stuck in the customs process.

Under the second alternative, the importer or exporter can begin by posting the security and clearing the goods through customs. Once this process is complete, if the importer or exporter disagrees with the security amount, they have 30 days, after import or export, to submit a written request to the officials for an official letter detailing the amount of the security. After receiving the letter, they can file a petition to the Customs Department to reconsider it.

In a major change favorable to importers and exporters, the reconsideration of the security amount is not solely decided by the Customs Department as before. Under the new process, the petitioner (the importer or exporter) may appoint two qualified persons as arbitrators.

The Notification sets up an arbitration panel composed of two arbitrators appointed by the Customs Department and another two appointed by the petitioner. The panel has the authority to request any documents from either the importer or exporter or any divisions in the Customs Department, including witnesses.

The decision of the panel is subject to a majority vote. If a decision cannot be made, the panel will select an umpire to determine the matter. The outcome of the decision will be delivered to the port of importation or exportation.

Importantly, the Notification applies only in cases where there is a dispute concerning the amount of duty arising from the value of the products. It does not apply to disputes on duty arising from tariff rates, as Section 12 of the Customs Act addresses only disputes on duty relating to the value of the products.

If the amount of security is small, it is likely that the importer or exporter will choose simply to accept the amount assessed by the customs officials, rather than going to arbitration. From the perspective of importers and exporters, the current barriers to the arbitration process include:

  • Unfamiliarity with the procedures outlined in the notification.
  • Difficulty in selecting qualified arbitrators who have knowledge about the specifications of the products and customs procedures.
  • Cost of appointing an arbitrator.

But the benefit of this new Notification is that it provides a fairer venue in which importers and exporters can have their arguments heard. This is a significant step forward for the Customs Department, as the idea of setting up an arbitration panel is quite forward-thinking, and only a few other countries have similar processes.

This can be seen as one example of the Customs Department’s commitment to alleviating organizational problems. It demonstrates a real attempt to improve management systems in a way that will help solve ongoing problems such as delays, unfair treatment, and corruption.

Undoubtedly, this Notification will be a useful mechanism to help importers and exporters, who will need to keenly monitor its implementation in practice.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

May 8, 2021
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the aviation industry to face arguably the most challenging time in its history. Airlines across the world, including in Southeast Asia, have been deeply affected by the prolonged and universal halt to international air travel. Domestic flights have provided some much-needed revenue to local carriers. But with multiple and unforeseen waves of new virus cases, lockdowns and other travel restrictions, and a public generally fearful of travelling, domestic flights have not been enough to make up for the massive shortfall in revenue lost from international air travel. Despite all the current gloom for the aviation industry, there may be light at the end of the tunnel as the world glimpses life after the pandemic. This is mainly down to vaccinations. With people confined to their homes for over a year in many Western countries, there is pent-up demand to travel. As those people are vaccinated, they will want to get out of their houses and fly somewhere. Moreover, household savings have increased for those fortunate enough to be working throughout the pandemic in their homes, and with few options to go out and spend. This combination of travel demand and increased disposable income is a strong combination for positive growth in the post-pandemic aviation industry. In the context of Vietnam, which to date has managed to minimize outbreaks from occurring in the country, from around the middle of September 2020 airlines announced to fly again and increase the frequency of many domestic flights. Airlines also sought to restore some international commercial routes to meet the needs of passengers, contribute to connecting trade, and maintaining production and business activities. However, despite domestic demand, true recovery and economic success can only occur when passengers can again travel internationally, both inbound and outbound. As such, the critical
April 19, 2021
Thailand has made significant changes to its statutory interest rate framework for the first time in almost a century. Since 1925, the statutory interest rate codified in Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code (the CCC) has remained at 7.5% per year. But with Covid-19 having an unprecedented impact on the Thai economy, the Thai Government, via emergency decree, has reduced the statutory rate. While the decree is largely aimed at providing relief to hard-hit SMEs and individual debtors, the amendments have broader implications for doing business in Thailand. Main Changes The new interest rate revisions are contained within the Emergency Decree Amending the Civil and Commercial Code B.E. 2564 (2021) (the Emergency Decree), which was published in the Government Gazette on April 10, 2021 and came into effect on April 11, 2021. The Emergency Decree amends Sections 7 and 224 of the CCC, which stated the previous statutory interest rate of 7.5% per year. The Emergency Decree makes three major changes. The first involves a reduction of the statutory interest rate from 7.5% per year to 3% per year in Section 7. The new 3% annual rate is subject to review every three years by the Ministry of Finance. The interest rate is subject to further change later by a royal decree. The second change concerns money debts under Section 224 of the CCC. The previous version of Section 224 stated, among other things, that a money debt based on a default bears interest of 7.5% per year. Under the Emergency Decree, the new actual statutory default interest rate is the statutory interest rate stated in Section 7 with an additional rate of 2% per year. The result is a 5% annual statutory default interest rate. Since the statutory default interest rate is based in part on the Section 7
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions