WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/W/165 
13 November 2007 
 
 (07-4934) 
Committee on Customs Valuation Original:   English 
  
 
NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE CUSTOMS  
VALUATION AGREEMENT 
 
Questions from the United States regarding Thailand's Legislation
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 6 No vember 2007, has been received from the 
delegation of the United States.  It contains follo w-up questions posed to Thailand for the record of 
the meeting of the Committee on Customs Valuation held on 18 October 2007.    
 
_______________ 
 
  Regarding Thailand’s responses in docum ent G/VAL/W/158 (October 6, 2006) to the 
questions of the United States in G/VAL/W/143 (A pril 6, 2004), the United States appreciates 
Thailand’s long awaited responses to the United Stat es questions about Thailand’s implementation of 
the commitments in Articles 13 and 14 of the Cu stoms Valuation Agreement.  We have studied 
Thailand’s responses and have several follow-up questions.  
 
1. Regarding Sufficient Guarantee – Article 13 
 Despite Thailand’s explanation and confirma tion that it applies Article 13, the cited 
provisions (reproduced below) do not specifically relate to or require  customs to release the goods 
upon sufficient guarantee in cases wher e there is a delay or a dispute about the customs value of the 
goods, pursuant to Article 13.    Section 40:  Requirements of Customs to  be satisfied before release of goods 
 
 It shall be lawful to import into th e Kingdom any goods which at the time of 
importation are not prohibited by this or any other Law or by any ordinance or 
decree of His Majesty, provided that befo re such goods shall be released from the 
custody of the Customs the law shall have been fully complied with the goods shall have been duly entered, and the full duties of Custom paid or provided for by cash 
security.   
  Section 112:  Goods may be taken into cust ody or sampled pending settlement of dispute 
   If any dispute shall arise between the Department and an importer, exporter, 
merchant, dealer, or interested party in connection with any goods which are being 
passed through the Customs, such goods sha ll be removed to the Customs House or 
placed in a place of security pending th e settlement of the dispute, unless the 
proper officer and the owner of the goods, or his agent shall agree that a sample representing the goods shall be taken and the question at issue be decided therefrom, the revenue being safeguarded by the deposit at the Customs House of a sum sufficient to cover the highest duty chargeable on the goods .  G/VAL/W/165 
Page 2  
 
   
 Has Thailand adopted other laws or regulations that more specifically allow an importer to 
post a bond or other security and obtain its goods pending the final determination of customs value 
where there is a delay in determini ng the customs value of the goods? 
 
2. Interpretative Notes – Article 14 
 Although Thailand states that the above regulations are fully  committed to and implemented 
pursuant to Article 14 and Thailand confirms that th e Interpretative Notes are to be read and applied 
in conjunction with the Regulations, the fact remain s that many provisions of the Interpretative Notes 
are not included in the regulations, such as the de finition of “price actually paid or payable” in the 
Note to Article 1, the explanation regarding the ci rcumstances of sale test set forth in the Note to 
Article 1; the methods of determining the profit and general expenses set forth in the Notes to Articles 
5 and 6, and the explanation concerning the Article 8 additions, as set forth in the Note to Article 8. 
  The Interpretative Notes are integral to the proper implementation of the Agreement, and in 
our view, a statement in the regulations that the Interpretative Notes shall be read and applied in 
conjunction with the determination of customs value raises concerns about transparency.  It would be 
preferable for Thailand to more formally incorpor ate or adopt the Interpretative Notes of the CVA 
into Thailand’s customs laws and regulations.     SECTION 11 BIS OF THE CUSTOMS ACT B.E. 2469 
 
 The United States would note that it is important that Section 11 bis of the Customs Act B.E. 
2469 be repealed.  We understand that Royal Thai Customs has introduced legislation that would end 
the use of reference prices in dete rmining customs value under Section 11 bis, and that these changes 
have been approved by the Cabinet and Council of St ate.  We encourage the Thai Parliament to pass 
the legislation that would repeal reference pr icing from Thai customs laws and regulations. 
 
3. Decision 3.1 of the Customs Valuation Committee – Treatment of Interest Charges 
 We appreciate Thailand’s response to the qu estion in G//VAL/W/143 on the treatment of 
interest charges under financing arrangements whic h are covered by Decision 3.1.  We would be 
grateful if the Thai delegation could provide to the United States a copy of Customs Regulation 
No. 48 (B.E. 2547). 
  
4. Decision 4.1 of the Customs Valuation Committee – Treatment of Carrier Media 
Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment 
 Could the representative from Thailand provide an explanation of Thailand’s approach to 
customs valuation with respect to carrier media bearing software for data processing equipment? 
According to Article 1 of the Customs Valuati on Agreement, the customs value of imported goods 
shall be the transaction value.  How is Thailand’s appr oach consistent with Article 1?  Alternatively, 
software may be valued according to the method prescribed in paragraph 2 of Decision 4.1 on the 
Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software fo r Data Processing Equipment.  Is Thailand still 
considering the adoption of paragraph 2 of  Decision 4.1 in its valuation practices? 
 
 In addition to the questions in document G/ VAL/W/160, the United States seeks prompt and 
complete answers to the following additional questions:  (a) When Thailand has concerns about the accuracy  of the declared transa ction, what type of 
information can the importer provide to address these concerns? 
  G/VAL/W/165 
 Page 3 
 
 
  (b) If the importer can show that the declared va lue represents the price actually paid or payable 
for the imported merchandise plus the relevant  additions, will Thailand accept the declared 
value even if it is lower than its deductive value database price? 
 (c) There are numerous cases in which importers have appealed Thailand’s application of 
deductive value to importations of alcoholic  beverages.  When does Thailand expect 
resolution of these appeals? 
  Finally, we would note that given the seriousness of this situation, the United States, in collaboration with other interested Members, is ass essing all of its options to ensure that Thailand’s 
customs valuation practices fully comply with  its obligations under the Customs Valuation 
Agreement.   The United States would ask that this agenda  item be kept open for further debate at 
subsequent meetings of the Committee. 
 
 
__________