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

July 8, 2020

Thai Customs Offers Extension for Business Operators to Join One Stop Service Project

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Customs Department has extended the deadline for business operators to pay all outstanding taxes and import duties at the Post-Clearance Audit Division of the Customs Department. The Customs Department has also extended the deadline for requesting review of import duty penalties, fines, and surcharges on outstanding import duty amounts until September 30, 2021—a significant postponement of the previous deadline of April 30, 2020.

This extension is meant to ease the burden of honest business operators who have paid incorrect or incomplete import duty and tax, giving them a chance to review previous import duty and tax payments and take steps to address underpayment. This extension is under the Customs Department’s One Stop Service project, which allows business operators to pay outstanding taxes and import duties through the One Stop Service Center at the Post-Clearance Audit Division office of the Customs Department in Bangkok.

The One Stop Service project was originally open to businesses from April 1, 2018, to April 30, 2019, during which more than 150 business operators joined and met the required qualifications. In response to this success, the Customs Department agreed to open a second period from May 15, 2019, to April 30, 2020, which has now been extended to September 30, 2021.

One Stop Service Project

This is an important matter for any person involved with incomplete duty or tax, as section 202 of Customs Act B.E. (2560) 2017 stipulates that submitting incorrect or incomplete declarations, documentation, or other duty-related information is punishable by a fine of up to THB 500,000.

Typically, import duty penalties, fines, and surcharges on outstanding import duty—including value added tax (VAT) surcharges and penalties—are payable by business operators without review. Business operators who join the One Stop Service scheme, however, will be given the right to review these charges.

The One Stop Service project gives business operators who have paid incomplete tax and duty, despite operating in good faith, an opportunity to rectify payments themselves by submitting a letter to the project coordinator (i.e., the Post-Clearance Audit Division) with the required documents. After review, if there is no evidence that the business operator was dishonest, the business operator will receive the right to review the import duty penalty, fine, and surcharge on the outstanding import duty and petition the Customs Department to consider waiving or reducing the applicable charges. Nevertheless, business operator still have the obligation to pay all charges that are not covered by this project, such as VAT surcharges and related penalties.

However, any importer who has smuggled items into Thailand (with clear evidence of dishonest or fraudulent evasion of the duty or tax owed), imported prohibited or restricted items, or imported goods that violate intellectual property rights, is not eligible to join the project. Ongoing post-audit inspections, investigations, or prosecutions by the Department of Investigation, the Economic Crime Division, or another authorized entity, are also ineligible for the One Stop Service, as are any cases currently under consideration of the Board of Appeal or undergoing litigation procedures.

The Customs Department’s One Stop Service project is greatly beneficial to business operators who have operated in good faith but have ended up reporting incorrect or incomplete amounts, and the project indicates the Customs Department’s desire to foster positive relationships with business operators by easing some of the challenges associated with customs. If the Customs Department further loosens their restrictions on participation in the project—such as by allowing inclusion of cases undergoing post-audit inspection or investigation or extending to cover other charges–they would provide more opportunities for settlement and continue to build up good relations with business operators.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Customs and International Trade

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Tax

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 9, 2026
When unauthorized credit card transactions occur, who bears responsibility—the cardholder or the issuing bank? In Thailand, a landmark 2025 ruling by the country’s Supreme Court has clarified this question, establishing a stricter standard for banks in fraud disputes and significantly strengthening consumer protections. The case centered on disputed charges where a customer claimed their credit card had been used without authorization. The bank sued to recover the amount, and both the court of first instance and the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the bank. However, the Supreme Court overruled their judgments and decided that the customer did not need to pay for the unauthorized transactions, placing liability squarely on the bank. This ruling was based on three key findings, which are outlined below. Finding 1: Insufficient Expert Testimony In this case, the bank bore the burden of proving matters related to the credit card system’s manufacture, design, security, and operation, as required under the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 (2008). To meet this requirement, the bank presented testimony from two employees in its credit card department regarding ’security measures and issuance procedures. However, the Supreme Court found these witnesses unqualified as experts, as they did not present technical or academic evidence and did not possess specialized expertise in credit card technology. As a result, their testimony failed to establish that the bank’s credit card technology was sufficiently secure against fraudulent misuse. Finding 2: Contradictory Terms and Conditions The bank’s own credit card terms and conditions included a provision acknowledging that despite the card’s EMV security standards, cardholders must still exercise caution to prevent unauthorized access. The Supreme Court interpreted this clause as an explicit admission that credit card systems remain vulnerable to hacking and fraud, even with high-level security measures in place. This acknowledgment undermined the
Read More
February 3, 2026
Thailand’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR) landscape has evolved significantly over the past decade. Legislative reforms such as the Dispute Mediation Act and expanded court‑annexed mediation have strengthened non‑litigious options, while institutional choices have broadened. Parties can now choose between the Thai Arbitration Institute (TAI), the Thailand Arbitration Center (THAC), and a growing number of sector‑specific dispute forums. For businesses, these choices matter. Each forum has different rules, administration, costs, speed, and enforcement mechanisms. These factors can directly impact commercial leverage, recovery outcomes, and business continuity. Choosing the right forum and drafting an effective dispute resolution clause can materially influence how a dispute is resolved. This article outlines the practical differences between Thailand’s leading alternative dispute resolution forums, explains when each is likely to deliver the most value, and offers drafting and strategy tips to embed those advantages into your dispute resolution clauses. Why ADR Is Gaining Traction in Thailand Thai policy increasingly supports the resolution of civil and commercial disputes through ADR. Recent amendments to the Civil Procedure Code now provide for court-supervised pre-action and in-case mediation. This type of mediation has its advantages: it suspends limitation periods, involves no court fees, and can conclude with a consent judgment that is immediately enforceable and subject to only limited grounds of appeal. In parallel, the Mediation Act supports out‑of‑court mediation for qualifying disputes within defined subject‑matter and monetary thresholds. Valid settlement agreements reached under this law may be enforced through a streamlined court process. Thailand’s arbitration framework has also matured into a reliable, pro‑enforcement framework under the Arbitration Act, which closely follows the UNCITRAL Model Law and applies to both domestic and international cases, so cross‑border users see familiar rules. As Thailand is a signatory to the New York Convention, Thai courts generally recognize and enforce foreign awards subject only
Read More
January 29, 2026
Following the recent enactment of a comprehensive legal framework addressing sexual harassment, Thailand has launched a fast-track judicial process enabling victims of online sexual harassment to obtain court orders suspending and removing obscene content from the internet. On January 26, 2026, the Office of the Judiciary introduced the “Take It Down” procedure through the Court Integral Online Service (CIOS) platform, providing victims with their first direct, expedited pathway to halt the spread of online content that violates the new legal provisions against sexual harassment. This new remedy stems from section 284/4 of the Penal Code, introduced through the Act Amending the Penal Code (No. 30) B.E. 2568, which took effect on December 30, 2025. Under section 284/4, an injured person or a competent official may petition the court to suspend dissemination of violating data and remove the data from computer systems within a court-specified period. The court may also direct system controllers, service providers, or competent authorities to carry out the order and report back within 15 days. Filing through the CIOS Platform The CIOS platform serves as the primary electronic channel for these petitions. Key features include: Individuals can file online without appearing in person and may submit petitions at any time the system is available. Users must complete digital identity verification via the ThaID application to access the CIOS. Petitions under section 284/4 are limited to requests to suspend or remove violating content. Claims for monetary damages must be pursued separately, including via separate proceedings or prefiling mediation. Streamlined Review Process The submission workflow is end-to-end electronic, and the system provides step-by-step guidance. After submission, court staff review the petition before presenting it to a judge for consideration. The court may conduct an online inquiry to obtain additional information, and in-person attendance is required only if deemed
Read More
January 26, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed an updated Vietnam chapter to Foreign Investment Review 2026, a recently published global guide to the legal and regulatory environment for foreign investment in 25 jurisdictions worldwide. Published and distributed by Lexology Panoramic, the guide discusses law and policy on oversight of foreign investment, regulatory frameworks, procedural requirements, and other important stipulations for foreign investors. The Vietnam chapter was prepared by Kien Trung Trinh, a partner in the Tilleke & Gibbins’ Hanoi office, Dung Thi Phuong Le, an associate in the firm’s office in Ho Chi Minh City, Nguyen Thi Huong Nguyen, associate in Hanoi, and Ngan Thuc Nguyen, paralegal in Ho Chi Minh City. The Vietnam chapter covers the following topics: Law and Policy: Government policies and practices, main laws and their scope of application (including details on investment promotional measures), definitions, rules for state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds, relevant authorities and oversight, and national interest provisions. Procedure: Jurisdictional thresholds, national interest clearance, securing approval, the review process for competition clearance and associated penalties, involvement of authorities, facilitation of clearance, and post-closing regulatory powers. Substantive assessment: Substantive tests for clearance, authorities’ consultation with other countries and other relevant parties, transactional prohibitions and objections, mitigating arrangements and challenges to a decision, and protection of confidential information. Recent cases, updates, and trends: Relevant recent case law, key recent and ongoing developments. A PDF of the Vietnam chapter can be accessed through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar chapters to Foreign Investment Review 2026. Readers can also gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Foreign Investment Review 2026 guide and the rest of Lexology Panoramic’s varied offerings through this link.
Read More