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

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 INSIGHTS​ 

October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
October 30, 2025
Thailand has introduced a comprehensive overhaul of its tax litigation procedures that will significantly impact how tax disputes are handled. The Regulations for Tax Cases B.E. 2568 (2025) take effect on November 24, 2025, and repeal the prior B.E. 2544 (2001) regulations in full. These regulations support the implementation of the Act on the Establishment of the Tax Court and Tax Case Procedure (No. 3) B.E. 2568 (2025), which expands the Tax Court’s jurisdiction to certain criminal tax matters. Published in the Government Gazette on October 14, 2025, the regulations have been reorganized into three parts covering civil cases, criminal cases, and forms, and are designed to accelerate proceedings, tighten evidentiary discipline, and modernize court operations. Structural Reform and Scope The prior regime governed only civil tax disputes. Under the new framework, the regulations introduce a dedicated chapter for criminal cases alongside updated civil procedures, as the Tax Court now has express authority to adjudicate specified criminal tax offenses. Select mechanisms applied in civil case proceedings, such as electronic communication, recording testimony, and appointing experts, also apply to criminal proceedings mutatis mutandis where they do not conflict with criminal procedure. Civil Cases: Evidence Submission, Deadlines, and Scheduling Parties must submit, together with the witness list, originals of all documentary evidence, media, or electronic data (such as files, USB drives, or CDs), and all physical evidence in the party’s possession. Failure to submit any original within the deadline (see below) results in a loss of the right to adduce that item at trial, subject only to narrow exceptions where submission is impossible due to force majeure or where receipt of the evidence is indispensable to the interests of justice. The practical impact is that parties are now obligated to assemble and verify all original documents and data at the very
October 24, 2025
The Thai Arbitration Institute (TAI), a division of Thailand’s Office of the Judiciary, has taken a step toward harmonizing the tools available for dispute resolution. On August 8, 2025, the institute formally launched the TAI Mediation Center (TAI-MC). Although the amendments to TAI’s Arbitration Rules that will govern the TAI-MC have not yet been finalized, the framework now under consideration suggests that TAI is positioning itself to become a more attractive venue for commercial dispute resolution. In the regime contemplated under the current version of the amendments, TAI proceedings will adopt an “arbitration-annexed mediation” mechanism—commonly termed the “Med-Arb” model—while preserving the procedural safeguards indispensable to arbitral neutrality. Mediation will be entrusted to a separate, dedicated mediator appointed under the TAI-MC who is precluded from serving on the arbitral tribunal in the same matter. By clearly separating the functions of mediator and arbitrator, the institute eliminates any risk that confidential information disclosed during mediation could influence the adjudicatory outcome if the parties do not settle. Only when all parties subsequently make a request may that same mediator assume arbitral duties in the case. The parties will retain substantial autonomy in selecting the mediator. They may either designate a mediator by mutual consent or invite the TAI-MC to appoint one from its authorized panel. TAI has announced its intention to curate that panel with particular emphasis on commercial expertise and cross-cultural negotiation skills, supplemented by ongoing professional training. Where the parties cannot agree on remuneration, the mediator’s fee will default to a tariff comparable to the TAI-MC’s cost schedule, which under the current version of the amendments will be approximately THB 45,000 for disputes in which the aggregate claims do not exceed THB 10 million, with incremental increases tied to higher claim values. This predictable cost matrix is aimed at enhancing
October 24, 2025
In Vietnam, litigation is generally treated as a last resort in dispute resolution. Businesses often strive to avoid court proceedings, given the potential for disrupted relationships, higher costs, and lengthy timelines. Yet, litigation is sometimes unavoidable, whether to secure a remedy or respond to a claim. Familiarity with Vietnam’s court system and procedures is therefore crucial for any party involved in such matters. Civil Litigation in Vietnam offers a concise overview of the country’s civil court system and litigation process. The guide a highlights essential points for navigating legal disputes in Vietnam, whether as a plaintiff or a defendant. Tilleke & Gibbins also publishes a similar guide for Thailand. The full Civil Litigation in Vietnam guide is available as a PDF through the button below.