The Deputy Government Spokesperson refuted Pisarn’s remarks on U.S. tax issues, stressing that the 12.5% figure represents only one part and should not be used to draw overall conclusions. The full impact of Section 301 should be considered in comparison with competitors, while Thailand is accelerating the ART deal to maintain competitiveness in the market.
On 24 Sep 2026 GMT+7, Ms. Lalida Pertwivatana, Deputy Government Spokesperson at the Prime Minister's Office, addressed former Thai Ambassador to the U.S. Pisarn Manawapat’s comment that if the Agreement on Reciprocal Trade (ART) between Thailand and the U.S. results in Thai products facing taxes higher than 12.5%, Thailand would be at a disadvantage compared to neighboring countries and its competitiveness would be affected. She stated that comparing U.S. tax rates between Thailand and other countries requires consideration of all relevant data and processes, not just a single investigation figure to conclude the final rate.
“If comparing U.S. taxes between Thailand and other countries, critics should fully understand the entire process rather than using only partial information to form a misleading overall view. The 12.5% figure currently discussed arises from Section 301 related to forced labor investigations only and does not represent the final combined tax rate used to compare national competitiveness,” Ms. Lalida explained.
The Deputy Government Spokesperson explained that for Thailand, Section 301 measures to consider include two main issues: investigations concerning goods produced with forced labor and investigations into structural excess capacity and production overcapacity. Other countries may be subject to additional investigations.
The 12.5% rate Thailand faces in the forced labor case is only one element. Neighboring countries sometimes receive a 10% rate, influenced by their commitments under ART with the U.S. However, these countries also face impacts from other Section 301 investigations. Therefore, competitiveness comparisons must consider the total tax rate after all relevant measures, not just the single 12.5% figure.
“Taking Thailand’s 12.5% and comparing it directly to other countries’ 10% rates and concluding that Thailand is disadvantaged or uncompetitive is not a complete comparison. The process is ongoing, and competitors face other measures that must be included. The correct approach is to consider the final combined rates after all relevant measures before making comparisons,” Ms. Lalida concluded.