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​ 

July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
July 24, 2026
For businesses in Thailand’s regulated industries, the problem of “too many licenses” is one of the most familiar hurdles to getting a product to market. Take a simple example: importing the materials necessary to sell teriyaki chicken skewers. To legally do this, a business may need approvals from several different agencies—separate permits for the chicken (Department of Livestock Development), the dipping sauce (Thai FDA), the wooden skewers (Department of Forestry), and other ingredients, each under a different authority. This kind of overlap is often cited to argue for a “regulatory guillotine”—a systematic review to cut outdated or duplicative rules that slow investment and business activity. The Facilitation of Licensing and Public Service Consideration Act B.E. 2569 (2026) (Licensing Facilitation Act 2026) is Thailand’s most significant response yet to that concern. This article looks at the Facilitation Act 2026 through a life sciences and regulatory affairs lens—what it may mean for the manufacturers, importers, and distributors of food, drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, and similar products who routinely deal with several regulators to bring a single product to market. The Super License: One Approval Standing in for Many The reform with the clearest potential for regulated-product businesses is the law’s “super license” mechanism, referred to as a “main license” in the statute. Once a business obtains the main license for a regulated activity, it is automatically deemed to hold all related sublicenses issued by other agencies for that same activity, provided the activity has been designated as eligible in the Government Gazette. The Licensing Facilitation Act 2026 also creates a central application center, allowing applicants to submit a single application and pay all relevant fees at one point of contact, with the center routing the application to each agency through a shared information system. The potential benefits of this for businesses
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 20, 2026
On July 16, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a notification in the Government Gazette establishing detailed rules governing data subjects’ right of access under section 30 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The notification will take effect 60 days after publication—mid-September 2026—giving data controllers a limited window to bring their processes into compliance. Scope The notification covers requests to access or obtain copies of personal data and requests for disclosure of the source of data collected without consent. Data subjects may exercise their rights directly or through authorized representatives. Key Requirements Important requirements set by the notification include the following: Required request channels. Controllers must provide at least two request channels: direct submission at the business location and registered mail. Electronic channels are optional but, if offered, may also be used for fulfilling requests. Request contents. Requests must be in writing or in electronic form and include the data subject’s name, the preferred access method, details of the data requested, and the requester’s signature. Controllers may request additional identifying information as needed. Identity and authority verification. Controllers may require official identity documents for verification. Authorized representatives must provide authorization documents and identity documents for both the data subject and the representative. Alternative verification methods (e.g., digital authentication) are permitted if they do not unreasonably obstruct data subjects’ rights. Review and response timelines. Controllers must review requests within 15 days. If the request is incomplete, the controller must notify the requester and allow at least 15 days to correct deficiencies. If not corrected, the request may be treated as abandoned. Once verified, controllers must fulfill requests within 30 days, extendable by another 30 days for large-volume or complex requests with notice to the requester. Methods for providing access or copies. Controllers may fulfill