WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/W/158 
9 October 2006 
 (06-4825) 
Committee on Customs Valuation Original:   English 
  
 
 
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES REGARDING NOTIFICATION 
UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS VALUATION 
(G/VAL/W/143) 
Communication from Thailand
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 5 October 2006, is being circulated at the request of the delegation of Thailand. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
 Regarding Thailand’s notification under Articl e 22 of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and subse quent questions submitted 
by the United States with respect to Thailand’s Cu stoms Act B.E. 2469 and relevant regulations, the 
Royal Thai Customs, hereinafter referred to as  the RTC, would like to address and clarify the 
questions as follows:  Regarding Sufficient Guarantee 
 
 We continue to have concerns about Thaila nd's implementation of Article 13 of the WTO 
Valuation Agreement.  Article 13 requires that if, in the course of determining the customs value of imported goods, it becomes necessary to delay the fi nal determination of such customs value, the 
importer of the good shall
 nevertheless be able to withdraw th em from custom if, where so required, 
the importer provide sufficient guarantee in the form of a surety, a deposit or some other appropriate 
instrument, covering the ultimate payment of custom s duties for which the good may be liable.  The 
legislation of each Member shall make provisions for such circumstances.  Although Thailand states 
that the obligation of Article 13 is covered under Section 40 and Section 112 of the Customs Act B.E. 
2469, neither of these Sections provides an importer shall  be able to withdraw the goods from customs 
custody upon payment of sufficient guarantee as requi red by Article 13.  Section 40 simply provides 
that before the release of the goods, cash security sh all be provided. It does not mandate the release of 
the goods upon sufficient guarantee.  Similarly, S ection 112 (cited on page 2 as section 122) does not 
mandate the release of the goods upon sufficient gua rantee in all cases.  This section appears to 
authorize the goods to be removed to the Cust oms House. Please confirm our understanding of 
Section 40 and Section 112, or otherwise conf irm that goods shall be released upon sufficient 
guarantee in accordance with Article 13 of the Agreement. 
 
Answer   Thailand confirms that Section 40 and Sec tion 112 of the Customs Act B.E. 2469 fully 
comply with Article 13 of the WTO Custom s Valuation Agreement. These sections 
provide that, in the course of any necessary delay of the final determination of the customs value of imported goods, the importer is able to withdraw the goods from 
customs upon payment of sufficient guarantee, covering the ultimate payment of customs G/VAL/W/158 
Page 2  
 
  duties for which the good may be liable, as required by Article 13 of the WTO Customs 
Valuation Agreement.  
 
Regarding the Interpretative Notes 
  We continue to have concerns about Thaila nd's implementation of Article 14 of the WTO 
Valuation Agreement.  As provided in Article 14, the Interpretative Notes are an integral part of the 
WTO Valuation Agreement and the Articles are to be read and applied in conjunction with their 
respective notes. Many important principles of th e WTO Valuation Agreement are included in the 
Interpretative Notes. It is our view that at a minimum, Article 14 of the WTO Valuation Agreement 
requires that the most important provisions of the In terpretative Notes, such as the definition of price 
actually paid or payable, the explanations regarding the circumstances of sale test set forth in the Note 
to Article 1, paragraph 2.3; and the methods of determining the profit and general expenses set forth 
in the Notes to Articles 5 and 6 should be directly in corporated in the legislation and/or regulations.  
Otherwise, a correct and transparent application of  the WTO Valuation Agreement is difficult, if not 
impossible, to achieve.  
  Does Thailand intend to incorporate these provisi ons into its legislation, regulations, or 
similar official promulgation?  Answer   Thailand is fully aware that all WTO Member s have obligations unde r Article 14 of the 
WTO Customs Valuation Agreement, requiring that “The notes at Annex I to this 
Agreement form an integral part of this Agreement and the Articles of this Agreement 
are to be read and applied in conjunction w ith their respective notes. Annexes II and III 
also form an integral part of this Agreement.” 
   Upon the Customs Act B.E. 2469, Thailand initially passed Ministerial Regulation No. 
132 (B.E. 2543) of which Article 6 provides as follows:  
 
  “The notes in Annex 1: Interpretative No tes, of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 shall be read and 
applied, in conjunction with the valua tion of the customs value under these 
Ministerial Regulations.” 
 
  In 2004, by Article 2 of the Minister ial Regulation No. 145 (B.E. 2547), Thailand 
repealed and replaced Article 6 of the Mini sterial Regulation No. 132 (B.E. 2543) to 
include both Annexes I and III of the WTO Valuation Agreement. Therefore, currently Article 6 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 132 (B.E. 2543) reads:  
 
  “ The notes to Annex 1: Interpreta tive Notes and Annex III of the Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
shall be read and applied, in conjunction w ith the determination of customs value 
under these Ministerial Regulations.” 
 
  Thailand would like to reemphasize that th e MR. No. 132 (B.E. 2543) and MR. No. 145 
(B.E. 2547), are fully committed to and implemented pursuant to Article 14 of the WTO 
Customs Valuation Agreement. We would also like to confirm that all of Interpretative 
notes under Annex I, from General Note and Note  to Article 1 until Note to Article 15, 
are to be read and applied in conjuncti on with these Ministerial Regulations in its 
entirety. 
  Regarding Section 3. Section 11 bis of the Customs Act B.E. 2469, What is the status of the 
proposed legislation to repeal Section 11 bis of the Customs Act B.E. 2469?  G/VAL/W/158 
 Page 3 
 
 
   
Answer   The RTC has proposed the repeal of the use of reference prices in determining customs 
value under Section 11 bis of the Customs Act B.E. 2469 since the past 3 years, and such proposal has been approved by the Cabinet and Council of State. It is currently in the process of being presented to the Parliament fo r the official repeal. However, given the 
current changing political situa tion in Thailand, the process of repealing Section 11 bis of 
the Customs Act B.E. 2469 can be continued when the new Parliament is in effect. 
  The Decision on the Treatment of Interest Char ges referenced in the checklist pertains to 
Decision 3.1 of the Committee on Customs Valuation.  Decision 3.1 addresses when interest charges 
under a financing arrangement entered into by the buye r should not be regarded as part of the customs 
value.  Thailand's response does not cover this issu e.  Therefore, we still request information on how 
Thailand implements Decision 3.1.   Answer   In order to comply with Decision 3.1 of  the Committee on Customs Valuation, the RTC 
issued the Customs Regulation No. 48 (B.E. 254 7) to include the treatment of interest 
charges in the customs value of imported goods, as provided under Decision 3.1. This Customs Regulation has been implemented since September 8
th, B.E. 2547 (2004). 
 
Regarding the Valuatio n of Software   
  Could the representative from Thailand provid e an explanation of Thailand’s customs 
valuation practices with respect to carrier media bearing software for data processing equipment. According to Article 1 of the Agreement on Im plementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, the 
customs value of imported goods should be the tr ansaction value.  Does Thailand’s practice comply 
with Article 1?  Alternatively, software may be valued according to the method prescribed in Decision 
4.1 on the Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing So ftware for Data Processing Equipment.  Does 
Thailand apply Decision 4.1 in its valuation practices?   Does Thailand intend to adopt the Decision?   
 Answer   Currently, Thailand has not yet adopted D ecision 4.1 on the valuation of Carrier Media 
Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment and therefore does not apply such Decision in its valuation practices. Thailand is  currently considering the adoption of such 
Decision.   
 
__________