Thailand currently lacks a specific franchise act. Consequently, the legality of any franchise agreement is determined by its compliance with various existing laws, such as the Civil and Commercial Code, the Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) (as amended), and the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2530 (1997). Thailand is a freedom-to-contract jurisdiction. This allows for a high degree of flexibility and autonomy in contractual arrangements, provided that the terms do not violate any laws or public policy and do not fall under the scope of unfair contract terms. Given this, the requirement for fairness in franchise agreement terms often leads to uncertainty, but decisions from the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) can provide guidance on whether specific contentious terms are in fact fair.  One issue worth examining in this light is the inclusion of terms on nonrefundable franchise fees and strict purchasing conditions. Franchise Fee: Unfair to Refuse Refund? Nonrefundable franchise fees represent a significant upfront investment for franchisees, often becoming a point of contention if the franchise relationship deteriorates or the franchisor ceases operations. Their fairness and enforceability are frequently scrutinized by regulatory bodies like the TCCT, highlighting the critical balance between contractual freedom and franchisee protection. Faced with one such case, the TCCT considered whether it was unfair for the franchisor to refuse to refund the franchise fee after the franchisor ceased operations.  The franchisee had entered into a service agreement on August 2, 2021, and begun operating on October 9, 2021. However, by November 21, 2023, the franchisee was notified that the system would be shut down for maintenance, and by December 26, 2023, the franchisor announced the cessation of operations due to financial losses. The franchisee then requested a refund of the franchise fee. Unfortunately for the franchisee, the TCCT found that the franchisor’s

Global trade has become an everyday issue with immense effects on trade and the economy. Today’s global trade climate sees countries around the world engaged in trade negotiations aspiring to eliminate trade barriers. Customs tariffs and associated privileges are among the issues that most impact global trade flows and the import-export sector. Thailand has negotiated customs tariff privileges as part of its 14 free trade agreements (FTAs) with 18 countries, including six bilateral and eight regional agreements. These FTAs set forth criteria for member states to comply with and adopt into national law. To achieve customs privileges, one of the most important criteria is rules of origin, which indicate the originating country of imported or exported goods and the accompanying duty rates or privileges for reduction or exemption. Rules of Origin Under FTAs The rules of origin mapped out in FTAs allow for duty exemptions or rate reductions based on the determination of goods’ country of origin. This largely includes two main categories: Wholly obtained (WO) means the product was entirely produced in a single originating country and does not include any foreign (non-originating) content or manufacturing process. Product specific rules (PSR) are detailed criteria that define how each product’s origin is determined. PSR criteria that are often found in FTAs include “change in tariff classification” (determining origin based on sufficient transformation of materials), “regional value content” (requiring a minimum percentage of value to be added locally), and specific manufacturing or processing operations (mandating particular production steps occur in the originating country). These criteria also extend to cover other subordinated methods of verification, such as accumulation rules and de minimis rules, to provide more flexibility for the establishment of origins and tariff privileges under such FTAs. Compliance Challenges Despite attempts to promote international trade and eliminate trade barriers through

The Department of Trade under Myanmar’s Ministry of Commerce (MOC) issued a schedule of revised service fees for trade-related services, effective October 15, 2025. The revised fees are contained in Newsletter of Export/Import 6/2025, which supersedes the previous rates set out in 2018 and 2020. Service Fees The revised fees include the following: Annual fee for TradeNet 2.0, the MOC online platform for trade submissions: MMK 50,000 (approx. USD 23.81) Online service application fee: MMK 10,000 (approx. USD 4.76) Import or export license renewal (including for all imported goods exempt from the license fees): MMK 50,000 (approx. USD 23.81) for initial renewal (two months) MMK 30,000 (approx. USD 14.29) for second renewal (one month) Amendment of license information: MMK 10,000 (approx. USD 4.76) per amendment Return of export/import license: MMK 30,000 (approx. USD 14.29) Late fees for renewal/amendment of import or export license: MMK 5,000 (approx. USD 2.38) if within one month of expiry MMK 10,000 (approx. USD 4.76) if later than one month after expiry Submission Schedule License renewal applications submitted more than 14 days after the license expiration date will not be processed. Applications for license amendment must be submitted in advance of the relevant goods’ arrival at Myanmar ports or airports. For more information on this announcement, or on any aspect of import and export matters in Myanmar, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].

On September 12, 2025, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) officially released its AI Risk Management Guidelines for Financial Service Providers, building upon the draft guidelines issued in June 2025. The guidelines reflect a balanced approach, encouraging innovation while safeguarding financial stability and consumer protection. The guidelines are targeted at all financial service providers, including financial institutions and special financial institutions under the Financial Institution Business Act, as well as payment providers under the Payment Systems Act. The guidelines apply to both AI systems developed in-house and those developed by third parties that are adopted for use by financial service providers. AI Risk Management Guidelines The two main pillars in managing AI risk are (1) governance of AI system implementation and (2) AI system development and security controls, consisting of the following key elements: 1. Governance Stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Boards and senior management assume accountability for decisions and operations involving AI systems, and are responsible for defining roles and responsibilities for AI oversight. This includes establishing an AI system usage policy, designating personnel responsible for AI risk management, and building awareness of AI-related risk within the organization. Organizations are expected to foster internal capabilities to use AI securely and avoid overreliance that could compromise business continuity or customer service. AI system usage policy. Policies governing AI usage should align with organizational goals, regulatory obligations, and recognized responsible AI frameworks—such as the FEAT principles (fairness, ethics, accountability, and transparency). These policies should be reviewed regularly to respond to technological advancements and evolving risk profiles. Risk management throughout the AI lifecycle. Risk management should encompass the entire AI lifecycle, from establishing risk appetite to implementing continuous risk assessment and control measures tailored to specific use cases. Financial service providers should assess risks and impacts of AI usage on operations and customer services.