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

January 21, 2026

Growing Canadian Investment in Southeast Asia: An Interview with Andrew Stoutley, COO of Tilleke & Gibbins

Thai-Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Spurred by global geopolitics and Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which aims to forge deeper ties with ASEAN, Canadian companies have been showing growing interest in Thailand and Southeast Asia in recent years. To understand the opportunities offered by the region, we sat down with Andrew Stoutley, a Toronto native and the chief operating officer of Tilleke & Gibbins, a leading Southeast Asian regional law firm with over 130 years of history in Thailand.

Q: Why are Canadian companies looking at Thailand and Southeast Asia right now?

A: Two reasons stand out. First, diversification has moved up the agenda. Many Canadian companies want options outside North America due to tariff volatility and policy uncertainty in the United States, as well as questions around the next Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement mandatory joint review. At the same time, the shift of global production from China to Southeast Asia is accelerating, driven by rising costs, geopolitics, and the need to avoid overreliance on a single market. As a result, Canadian companies are looking for a second production base or a regional hub, and Thailand and its neighbors are natural choices given their manufacturing depth, location, and established supply chains.

Second, Canada’s own efforts in the region are gaining traction. The Indo-Pacific Strategy has led to more on-the-ground support, including larger trade missions, upgraded diplomatic posts, and new financing options. Export Development Canada (EDC) now has a presence in Bangkok, giving Canadian companies a direct line to financing and insurance in Thailand. There’s also steady progress on trade frameworks like the recently signed Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (which will come into effect pending domestic procedures), ongoing negotiations of a Canada–ASEAN FTA, and the exciting announcement about the launch of negotiations of a Canada–Thailand FTA. Together, these developments have the potential to make it much easier for Canadian businesses to enter and operate in the region.

Q: What makes Thailand a good base for a regional strategy?

A: Thailand combines a strong industrial base with reliable infrastructure and a skilled workforce, with lower costs than Singapore or Hong Kong, making Bangkok a practical and affordable hub for managing operations across Southeast Asia. The Thai Board of Investment offers incentives for targeted sectors, which can make a real difference in the early years of a project. And Thailand’s comparatively stable business and legal environment—marked by predictable regulation, established licensing routes, and reliable dispute resolution—underpins regional planning and execution.

To take advantage of all that Thailand has to offer, however, planning is key. Early on, companies should check whether available incentives fit their plans, make sure they fully understand foreign ownership limits and the local regulatory environment, and build relationships on the ground. When eyeing a regional strategy, it’s also important to remember that Southeast Asia isn’t one market. A plan that fits Thailand may need to be reworked in Vietnam or Cambodia, as each country has different approvals, data rules, local director requirements, and employment norms. The right mindset is to build a regional model that can be localized, not a single template you try to force everywhere.

Q: What sectors are you seeing the most interest in from Canadian companies?

A: Advanced manufacturing and the EV ecosystem are attracting significant interest. Clean energy and energy efficiency are busy as more climate finance becomes available. Digital services and fintech are very active. We’re also seeing a lot of interest in agribusiness, healthcare and life sciences, logistics and supply chain, education, and tourism and hospitality. The common thread is that Canada’s priorities and Thailand’s policy goals are lining up, which makes it easier to build projects both sides want to see succeed.

Q: For companies entering Thailand or Southeast Asia, what should they look for in a legal partner?

A: Look for two things: an international service mindset and real local depth. If you’re a multinational, you need a firm that has worked with foreign companies and understands how your in-house team operates, what your timelines look like, and how you measure risk. At the same time, you need advisors who know how the law is applied day to day—what works with regulators, what commercial terms are consistent with market norms, and what issues are likely to arise. When those two elements come together, you gain the confidence of clear, reliable guidance that helps you navigate complex markets with minimal disruption.

Track record matters too. Tilleke & Gibbins has acted for inbound investors in Thailand for more than a century and, in recent years, across the rest of Southeast Asia. Most of our clients are multinational companies, so our approach to service is built around their expectations, backed by local judgment and relationships.

Q: As COO of Tilleke & Gibbins, how do you make sure your operations actually translate into better outcomes for clients?

A: I think about the COO role as creating the conditions for great client work. For us, that starts with making a regional firm feel seamless to a client running a project across Thailand, Vietnam, and beyond. Our team members have spent years working closely together across offices and practice areas so the quality is consistent, while still reflecting the realities on the ground in each jurisdiction. By working as one team across borders and disciplines, we’re able to support clients with the full range of services they need to succeed in Southeast Asia’s dynamic markets.

I’ve been with Tilleke & Gibbins for nearly 20 years, and what keeps me here is the culture. It’s collaborative. When a client brings us a complex mandate—say, a cross-border investment that cuts across regulatory matters, employment, data, and tax—we can quickly assemble a team that’s technically strong and commercially minded.

Innovation helps too. We use secure generative AI tools to accelerate routine work—first drafts, clause comparisons, issue spotting—so our lawyers can focus on strategy and judgment. Everything goes through human review by our lawyers, with strict confidentiality and approval guardrails. The result is faster turnaround, clearer documents, and better consistency in the work we’re delivering to clients.

Q: Any final advice for Canadian executives who are thinking about setting up in Thailand?

A: Start with a plan that can scale across the region, but don’t skip the country-by-country details. Lean on the Canadian institutions here to help, like the EDC, the Trade Commissioner Service, and CanCham’s great network. Track progress on the Canada–ASEAN and Canada–Thailand FTAs, and use these tools to design supply chains that reduce exposure to U.S. policy swings. Combine that support with good local advice, and Thailand provides a strong base for long-term growth.

 

This interview was originally published in issue 1/2026 of Voyageur, the magazine of CanCham Thailand (Thai-Canadian Chamber of Commerce).

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,
August 10, 2026
On June 17, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 on Nutritional Information on Processed Food Labels. The new regulation, which revokes three previous nutrition labeling regulations, introduces several notable changes affecting food and beverage manufacturers, importers, and distributors. These changes range from updated nutrient reference values and serving-size requirements to the introduction of the Nutri-Level front-of-pack labeling system for certain beverage products. Businesses operating in Indonesia should carefully review these developments and assess their products’ compliance with the new requirements during the transition period. Implementation of the Nutri-Level Labeling System To implement the recently issued decree on Nutri-Level labeling, BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 stipulates the requirements to implement the Nutri-Level labeling system on the front-of-pack. Under the new framework, ready-to-drink beverages, powdered beverages, and liquid or solid concentrates are required to display Nutri-Level labeling on the front label of their packaging. The Nutri-Level labeling system classifies products into color-coded levels A through D based on their sugar, sodium, and total fat content. The applicable Nutri-Level is determined based on the lowest level measured in the assessment of sugar, sodium, and total fat content. For products classified as level C or D, the Nutri-Level label must be accompanied by information on the relevant sugar, sodium, and total fat content per 100 ml of the ready-to-consume product. Products classified as level A or B may either display only the Nutri-Level designation or display the Nutri-Level together with the relevant nutritional information per 100 ml. Minimum Vitamin and Mineral Content Required for Declaration BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 introduces a stricter threshold for the declaration of vitamins and minerals in the nutritional value information section (ING). Vitamins or minerals may only be declared if they are present at a
August 10, 2026
The drug registration process in Vietnam will be simplified, particularly for foreign applicants, following the recent issuance by Vietnam’s Ministry of Health (MOH) of a new circular that is expected to reduce administrative hurdles. Circular No. 32/2026/TT-BYT on the registration of drugs and medicinal ingredients (Circular 32) was issued on July 29, 2026, and will take effect on October 1, 2026, replacing Circular No. 12/2025/TT-BYT. Key provisions of the new circular are discussed below. Five-Year Data Exclusivity and Five-Month Public Disclosure Framework Circular 32 updates data protection guidelines by explicitly referencing Article 128 of the amended Intellectual Property Law, which sets out that new drugs supported by clinical trial data submitted for the first time will be granted a five-year data exclusivity period from the date of the initial marketing authorization (MA) approval. Subsequent applications that rely on the originator’s protected data will not be eligible for approval from the date of submission of the originator’s registration dossier until five years after the first MA is granted. Furthermore, in accordance with the new regulations, the regulatory authority must publicly disclose information on subsequent applications five months before the granting of MA, providing originator companies with an opportunity to exercise and enforce their intellectual property rights. Simplified Requirements for Foreign Legal Documents Circular 32 expands the circumstances under which legal documents issued by foreign authorities are exempt from consular legalization and authenticity verification requirements. Specifically, such documents may be exempt if the Drug Administration of Vietnam (DAV) is able to verify their authenticity directly through official electronic means, including written confirmation or email correspondence sent directly to the MOH by the competent foreign authority, or publicly accessible English-language databases maintained by recognized foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the new circular permits the submission of electronic notarized copies of legal documents
August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore