Integrity Legal

3rd October
2017

It recently came to the attention of the administration of this web log that the Royal Thai Gazette has recently published an announcement regarding changes to the methodology in which Value Added Tax (VAT) is calculated in Thailand. Below please find an English translation of this announcement:

Page 6

Book 134 Part 102 Kor                         Royal Thai Government Gazette                  2 October 2017

(Official Emblem)

ROYAL DECREE

Issued under the Revenue Code

Regarding Value Added Tax Rate Reduction (No. 646)

B.E.2560 (2017)

————————————-

His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun,

Given on 30 September 2017

of the second year in the present reign.

His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun is graciously pleased to proclaim that:

Whereas it is appropriate to adjust the Value Added Tax Rate Reduction.

By virtue of Section 175 of Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and Section 80 of the Revenue Code which amended by Revenue Code Amendment Act (No. 30) B.E. 2534 (1991) Be it; therefore, enacted by His Majesty the King, as follows:

Section 1. This Royal Decree shall be called the “Royal Decree under the Revenue Code, regarding Value Added Tax Rate Reduction (No. 646) B.E.2560 (2017)”

Section 2. This Royal Decree shall come into force on and from the date of 1st October B.E.2560 (2017).

Section 3. The order of the Head of the National Council for Peace and Order No. 65/2559 on the Reduction of Value Added Tax Rate dated on 1st November B.E.2559 (2016) shall be repealed.

Section 4. There shall be reduced the Value Added Tax Rate in accordance with Section 80 of the Revenue Code and shall withhold at the following details;

(1) In the rate of 6.3 percent of sale, service or import in all kind thereof which shall be effective from the date of 1st October B.E.2560 (2017) to 30th September B.E.2561 (2018).

(2) In the rate of 9 percent of sale, service or import in all kind thereof which shall be effective on and from the date of 1st October B.E.2561 (2018).

Section 5. The Minister of Finance shall have the care and charge of this Royal Decree.

Countersigned

Colonel-General Prayut Chan-o-cha

Prime Minister

 

For those interested in viewing the Thai version of the original announcement please click HERE to go to the view the PDF from official website of the Royal Thai Gazette. Please note that this translation is provided for informational purposes only and should not be viewed as a definitive legal interpretation of Thai law.

Two provisions are notable within this announcement, the first is that the VAT is to be lowered from 7% to 6.3% for the next year. Meanwhile, from October of 2018 onward the effective VAT tax rate is apparently to be 9%. This is an overall increase from the current rate of 7% which was the rate prior to the recent announcement.


21st September
2017

In recent weeks various sources have discussed the changes to tax policy in Thailand, specifically with reference to changes in the excise tax regime. Specifically, with regard to excise tax (also described by some as a “sin tax”) there was discussion before the new measures were implemented concerning the possibility that the new taxes would be relatively significant. Ultimately, events have transpired which has shown that the new measures have not resulted in a substantial increase in terms of taxes passed on to the consumer. The increased taxes have turned out to be rather nominal, but the methodology by which taxes are calculated has changed. Therefore, the end consumer may not see much of a change, but those further up-stream in terms of distribution are dealing with issues associated with the new calculation method.

Meanwhile, other recent measures have taken effect throughout 2017 which is changing the way revenue collection and tax enforcement is conducted. First, it appears that there will be an increase in VAT (Value Added Tax) placed upon items purchased online in Thailand. It appears Thai officials are keen to increase revenues from the digital economy. In the past, the revenue collection system of Thailand was geared to deal with tax collection in a manner more suitable to the pre-internet online economy. Where once there were a number of exemptions for online purchases now those exemptions are being phased out as revenue authorities are coming to grips with the fact that more economic transactions are occurring online.

Finally, it is worth noting that so-called e-filing of certain corporate tax documentation is now mandatory in Thailand. Paperwork such as the audited financial statement are required to be filed online. To those with experience dealing with tax matters in other jurisdictions this new requirement may seem long past due as many other jurisdictions have conducted such matters online for years (in some cases decades). However this development has only come to pass in Thailand in 2017. In the future it appears likely that many corporate tax filings will be perfected online.

In conclusion, all of the above information, when taken together, illustrates a trend which has been progressing for a few years now. Namely, an drive to increase the efficiency and improve the methodology by which taxes are assessed and collected in Thailand. It seems logical to infer that this trend will culminate in the full transformation of the Thai tax system and that said system will be thereafter much more similar to internal revenue services in countries in the more developed world. This will likely occur before the back drop of an increasingly dynamic Thai economic and it seems sensible to expect that revenue to Thai state coffers will increase thereby.


29th July
2017

If there is one overriding notion that can be gleaned from the whole of this blog it should be this: over time the process of obtaining immigration and work authorization benefits (regardless of the nation in which such benefits are sought) tends to get more time consuming and difficult over time.

In Thailand, over the course of recent months there have been dramatic changes to both the Thai visa process as well as the process by which Thai work permit authorization is granted.

Initially, this trend began with the promulgation of the so-called “Good Guys in Bad Guys Out” policy which was initiated by a newly appointed Thai Immigration Chief. At first, the program focused upon those who were clearly in Thailand with less-than-optimal intentions. In fact, the beginning of the sea change in immigration policy could be said to have occurred when there was a rather significant round-up of suspected criminals and over-stayers which culminated in significant numbers of deportations. Quickly thereafter it became clear that those wishing to effectively live in Thailand using things such as 30 day stamps and tourist visas would be a thing of the past as a clear cap was placed on issuance of 30 day visa exemption stamps and those with multiple tourist visas began to become the subject of enhanced scrutiny at border check points. This scrutiny has been recently evidenced by the fact that those entering Thailand on tourist visas with a history of multiple tourist visas are being asked to show that they have 20,000 baht in their possession at the time of entry into the Kingdom.

Meanwhile, recently promulgated legislation has created more severe penalties with respect to working illegally in Thailand. Enhanced civil and criminal penalties are at the forefront of the recent changes. As of the time of this writing a sort of moratorium has been placed upon the implementation of these new rules, but it has been made very clear by relevant authorities that these new provisions are set to come into effect as of January 1, 2018. It is this blogger’s opinion that the moratorium was only enacted to stem the exodus of migrant workers from neighboring countries and will effectively have no bearing upon foreign workers in Thailand from Western countries or countries further afield than those which border the Kingdom.

What can be taken from these developments? First, certain aspects of the immigration and work authorization regimes were outdated and needed to be upgraded. Meanwhile, Thai authorities have made it clear that they expect those who wish to live and work in Thailand to make appropriate efforts to obtain proper immigration and employment documentation. Where there was something of a lax attitude regarding these issues in the past such laxity cannot be expected to exist moving forward. Therefore those wishing to live and work in Thailand in the future are well advised to do substantial research before traveling to Thailand and after ascertaining the correct legal documentation, take necessary steps to only be physically present in Thailand on appropriate documentation.


26th June
2017

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that there are new penalties associated with violation of the laws and rules regarding foreign nationals working in Thailand as set forth by the Thai Ministry of Labor. Specifically on June 22 of 2017 an Emergency Decree was promulgated stipulating some new rules and new penalties associated with both new and old regulations. Please see below for a distilled translated summary of the important points noted in this recent decree:

  1. Should an employer employ a foreign national to work in a position specifically restricted to Thai nationals, such employer shall be fined between 400,000 and 800,000 Baht per employed foreign national.
  2. Should an employer allow a foreign national to work outside the scope of the employment specifically noted in the work permit they shall be fined no more than 400,000 Baht for each employed foreign national.
  3. Should a foreign national work without first obtaining a work permit or work in a position specifically restricted to Thai nationals, they may be subject to imprisonment of no more than five years and/or fined between 2,000-100,000 Baht, or both.
  4. Should a foreign national work on a matter which is deemed immediate and important and do so without acknowledgment of a Labour Ministry officer by receiving form WP-10, they may be fined not more than 100,000 Baht.
  5. Should a foreign national work outside the scope of the job description set forth in the work permit, they may imprisoned not more than 6 months and/or fined not more than 100,000 Baht, or both.
  6. If an individual, through deceptive means, explicitly or implicitly advertises that they are able to bring a foreign national to work in Thailand in a dmestic capacity without a work permit, they may be imprisoned 3-10 years and/or fined 600,000-1,000,000 Baht, or both.
  7. Anyone found operating as a foreign job placement agency without a proper license shall be subject to possible imprisonment for 1-3 years and/or fines ebtween 200,000-600,000 Baht, or both.
  8. There appears to be a deposit/pre-authorization requirement being imposed by this decree, but the implications of this section are somewhat unclear. We will update this posting or post again to provide clarification on this point if necessary.

It should be noted that the above summary and translation is for informational purposes only and should be viewed as neither exhaustive nor as a substitute for fully analyzed legal research and translation. Those interested in delving further into this topic are urged to view the full decree in its entirety by following this link provided by the official wesbite of the Royal Thai Gazette.

As has been noted, in recent weeks and months there has been increased scrutiny from the Royal Thai Immigration Police with respect to Thai business visa applicants in the form of surprise inspections. This recent announcement regarding heightened penalties associated with imporperly obtained Thai work permits leads this blogger to infer that heightened scrutiny and possible inspections could be imposed upon foreign nationals working in Thailand in the relatively near future.


22nd June
2017

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that President Trump recently promulgated an executive order which amends a prior Obama administration order which dealt directly with processing procedures for non-immigrant visas to the United States of America. This Presidential executive order was enacted on June 21, 2017. The most pertinent section of the order, in this blogger’s opinion, reads as follows:

Section 1.  Amendment to Executive Order 13597.  Executive Order 13597 of January 19, 2012 (Establishing Visa and Foreign Visitor Processing Goals and the Task Force on Travel and Competitiveness), is amended by deleting subsection (b)(ii) of section 2 of that order.

In order to better understand the importance of this amendment, it is important to quote directly from the aforementioned order, specifically the section being deleted:

(b) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the heads of such agencies as appropriate, shall develop an implementation plan, within 60 days of the date of this order, describing actions to be undertaken, including those that build upon efforts underway, to achieve the following…

(ii) ensure that 80 percent of nonimmigrant visa applicants are interviewed within 3 weeks of receipt of application, recognizing that resource and security considerations and the need to ensure provision of consular services to U.S. citizens may dictate specific exceptions;

As the underlined portion noted above points out the specific section which has been deleted seems imply that fast non-immigrant visa processing is no longer a significant priority of the administration. Moreover, the President has specifically ordered Department of State personnel to disregard the previous administration’s clear policy of using best efforts to quickly process visa applications of those seeking non-immigrant visa benefits for the USA.

What type of visa applicants will most likely be affected by this policy change? Applicants for visas such as the B-1 visa (business visa), the B-2 visa (tourist visa), F-1 visa (student visa), J-1 visa (exchange visitor visa), as well as any other visa which is considered a non-immigrant visa (with the probable exception of so-called “dual intent visas“) will be directly impacted by this recent order. Concurrently, what will this mean in practical terms for processing of future visa applications? On the bright side, it takes time for policies to be enacted and thus result in a substantial impact on applicants. Furthermore, as the previous administration enacted policies to speed up non-immigrant visa processing and made practical provisions associated therewith it seems logical to infer that such measures are unlikely to be reversed quickly. Therefore, those seeking non-immigrant visa benefits in the near future are unlikely to be overwhelmingly adversely affected. That stated, those seeking similar benefits in a longer term context could see application processing times lagging compared to present time frames.


27th May
2017

It has come to this blogger’s attention that the new administration in the USA has promulgated policies which will place more scrutiny upon those who may be applying for visas to the USA in the future. The proposed “extreme vetting” of US visa applications in a Consular Processing context appears to be aimed at narrow subsets of “red flagged” visa applicants. In order to best summarize this policy shift, it is necessary to quote directly from a relatively recent Reuters article:

The final cable seen by Reuters, issued on March 17, leaves in place an instruction to consular chiefs in each diplomatic mission, or post, to convene working groups of law enforcement and intelligence officials to “develop a list of criteria identifying sets of post applicant populations warranting increased scrutiny.” Applicants falling within one of these identified population groups should be considered for higher-level security screening…

The new administration appears keen to narrowly target those applicants which are deemed to be appropriate for “increased scrutiny”. However, a rather recent proposal has been submitted by the U.S. Department of State requesting implementation of the emergency review procedures of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In short, the DOS is requesting expedited processing of a request to modify the forms associated with applications for US visas. To quote directly from the US government website Regulations.gov:

The Department proposes requesting the following information, if not already included in an application, from a subset of visa applicants worldwide, in order to more rigorously evaluate applicants for terrorism or other national security-related visa ineligibilities:

  • Travel history during the last fifteen years, including source of funding for travel;
  • Address history during the last fifteen years;
  • Employment history during the last fifteen years;
  • All passport numbers and country of issuance held by the applicant;
  • Names and dates of birth for all siblings;
  • Name and dates of birth for all children;
  • Names and dates of birth for all current and former spouses, or civil or domestic partners;
  • Social media platforms and identifiers, also known as handles, used during the last five years; and
  • Phone numbers and email addresses used during the last five years.

 

Most of this information is already collected on visa applications but for a shorter time period, e.g. five years rather than fifteen years. Requests for names and dates of birth of siblings and, for some applicants, children are new. The request for social media identifiers and associated platforms is new for the Department of State, although it is already collected on a voluntary basis by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for certain individuals.

It is this blogger’s opinion that the long term implications of these policy changes will be broad. However, from reading the aforementioned notice, it appears that, at the present time, DOS personnel will only be seeking more detailed information on certain individual applicants, and not from all applicants seeking visas to the USA. How will the narrow subset of applicants subject to increased scrutiny be determined? To answer that it is necessary to quote further from the Regulations.gov website:

Department of State consular officers at visa-adjudicating posts worldwide will ask the proposed additional questions to resolve an applicant’s identity or to vet for terrorism or other national security related visa ineligibilities when the consular officer determines that the circumstances of a visa applicant, a review of a visa application, or responses in a visa interview indicate a need for greater scrutiny.

Notwithstanding the fact that enhanced scrutiny will apparently only be applied on a case by case basis and only upon those individuals who are deemed to be in need of such scrutiny it seems logical to infer that at some point these additional screening protocols may be applied on a broader basis; if for no other reason than the fact that applying such scrutiny across the board might save time and resources of Consular Officials making cases by case determinations. As it stands, as of the time of this writing, the new protocols add a degree of uncertainty to the visa application process and Consular processing in general as it is difficult to foresee what may be considered a trait which warrants heightened scrutiny. Therefore, planning for such an eventuality is problematic.

As this situation continues to evolve this blog will post further updates.


24th April
2017

In recent weeks it has come to this blogger’s attention that some significant changes with respect to the duration of leases in Thailand have been not only proposed, but are apparently nearing a point where they might be implemented. While The Nation has taken note of the fact that various stakeholders in the Thai real estate sector have welcomed the possibility of 99 year leases for foreign investors in the Thailand property market (a proposal which has many restrictions in and of itself, including the requirements that such lease may only be possible in large industrial developments operating with the proposed Eastern Economic Corridor or EEC). Meanwhile the Bangkok Post has reported that various activist groups in Thailand are opposed to the proposal that 99 year leases be implemented. In this blogger’s view the more important issue is the fact that the implementation of new laws regarding Thai commercial leases appears very near at hand. To quote directly from the aforementioned Bangkok Post article:

[T]he government approved the land rental extension to 99 years, a policy change that will affect about 10 million people who are in need of land, he said. The cabinet’s resolution was made in a bid to promote the eastern special economic development zone to draw international investment linking the country more closely to the Asean community and beyond…

It should be reiterated that the leases at issue are of a commercial nature and appear only to be possible within specified zones, but the change is notable since for years 30 year leases were the norm in Thailand and the recent changes seem to mark a substantial shift in policy thinking. It should be noted that recently proposed changes may make it possible for foreign nationals to obtain a 50 year lease in Thailand on residential property. Clearly, all of these developments bode well for those wishing to invest in the Thailand property market.

Not everything is developing in a positive manner for everyone with respect to the use of real estate in Thailand. In recent weeks, there has been a great deal of clamor arising from the fact that officials affiliated with the Thai government have announced plans to severely curtail, if not outright ban, street food vendors in the Kingdom. To quote a recent article on the Voice of America website quoting an assistant to the Governor of Bangkok:

“The street vendors have seized the pavement space for too long and we already provide them space to sell food and other products legally in the market,” the assistant said. “So there will be no let-up in this operation – every street vendor will have to move out.”

It should be noted that what may appear to be “street food vendors” may in fact just be sellers of food in an open air environment, but occurring on private property in Thailand. Therefore, this blogger does not expect that outdoor dining on traditional Thai fare will disappear any time soon. However, it seems logical to infer that street vendors will likely be making deals with owners of Bangkok property to use their land in order to sell food. A question posed by many: why are authorities in Thailand doing this? Many of those posing this question do so for different reasons. Some note that street food is part of the tapestry of Bangkok life. Meanwhile, others note that restricting street food could have a detrimental impact upon tourism. Although this blogger does not necessarily agree with all of the restrictions being proposed with respect to street food two things should be noted. First, the thoroughfares of Bangkok have a tendency to become crowded and street food vendors had more than a tendency to exacerbate this crowding. Second, Thai authorities have continued to note issues related to the raising of government revenue and it is this blogger’s opinion that the restrictions on street food may be the government’s initiative to, at least indirectly, encourage some vendors to engage in the more regulated economy. The Value Added Tax accounts for a significant portion of Thailand’s overall revenue. Therefore, if authorities can encourage more businesses to become part of the VAT system then it stands to reason that the government could raise further revenue. This blogger knows for a fact that there are those street vendors who do pay VAT, but the percentage of such individuals in relation to the overall number of street vendors is quite small. Therefore, it seems likely that while on the one hand Thai authorities are making the streets in Bangkok more easily accessible the upshot may be a benefit to government coffers in the long run.


11th March
2017

It recently came to the attention of the administration of this web log that the subject of the Value Added Tax (VAT) has been a hot news item in Thailand in recent days as the current Prime Minister was noted speculating about the advantages to be gained by the Thai government if the VAT were to be raised one percentage point from the current level of 7% to 8%. To quote directly from The Nation’s website:

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has floated the idea of raising the value-added tax (VAT) rate by one percentage point from the current 7 per cent to 8 per cent to raise an additional Bt100 billion in annual tax revenues to finance various public projects.

Meanwhile, it became unclear from further reports whether the Prime Minister was simply expounding upon the advantages to be gained by an increase in VAT or if a change of policy was being discussed. To quote from the official website of the Bangkok Post:

Finance Minister Apisak Tantivorawong said the government plans to keep VAT unchanged at 7% for another year when the previous extension of the last period for keeping VAT at 7% ends on Sept 30. VAT would not increase during the term of this government, he added.

Setting aside the issue of what the Prime Minister’s intentions were with respect to his comments regarding VAT increase (and it would appear from this writer’s perspective that he was indeed simply commenting upon the benefits to be garnered by the government should VAT be increased to 8%) it appears that at least for the foreseeable future the VAT in Thailand will not be increased.

For those who have had experience doing business in Thailand VAT is known as a fact of business-life. In fact, those foreign nationals wishing to setup a Company in Thailand are well advised to note that in order to get a Thai work permit associated with such companies the relevant corporate entity oftentimes must be registered for VAT. Therefore, unlike Thai businesses which may or may not require VAT registration, foreign companies in Thailand will often be VAT registered and therefore an increase in VAT will have a substantial impact upon such enterprises.

Meanwhile, in the aftermath of recent changes to American policy with respect to US Immigration it appears that a number of new Immigration Judges have been impaneled to deal with the staggering backlog of United States Immigration cases in the Immigration Courts. To quote directly from Reuters News Service:

The Department of Justice is deploying 50 judges to immigration detention facilities across the United States, according to two sources and a letter seen by Reuters and sent to judges on Thursday. The department is also considering asking judges to sit from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., split between two rotating shifts, to adjudicate more cases, the sources said. A notice about shift times was not included in the letter.

Clearly, the new Administration in the USA is stringently enforcing immigration laws as evidenced by the recent stories of increased deportations, travel bans, and heightened scrutiny of immigrants (both Green Card holders and other immigrants) at ports of entry in the USA. It seems rather reasonable to infer that US Immigration matters are likely to be more difficult and time consuming to process in coming weeks and months.


9th February
2017

In the aftermath of the new year, there have been many announcements which have had significant impacts upon those living outside the USA. It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of the United States is poised to begin certifying delinquent taxes and communicating such certification to the United States Department of State. To quote the official IRS website directly:

The IRS has not yet started certifying tax debt to the State Department. Certifications to the State Department will begin in early 2017…If you have seriously delinquent tax debt, IRC § 7345 authorizes the IRS to certify that to the State Department. The [State] department generally will not issue or renew a passport to you after receiving certification from the IRS…Upon receiving certification, the State Department may revoke your passport. If the department decides to revoke it, prior to revocation, the department may limit your passport to return travel to the U.S.

As of January 1, 2016 US Federal statutes were amended to allow US passport revocation for those individuals who were delinquent in taxes under statutorily defined circumstances. Notwithstanding the fact that this law had been promulgated, it appears that until now the IRS had not put a frame work in place for notifying the State Department that an individual had tax delinquency issues. As can be seen from the IRS’s own website, that is no longer the case moving forward. For this reason it is prudent for those who may have tax delinquency issues to retain the services of a competent professional in order to rectify such issues before a situation arises where one is unable to get a passport issued, or a passport is revoked either in the USA or while traveling abroad.

Meanwhile, it appears that authorities in Thailand have adjusted the tax structure for certain taxpayers in Thailand. To quote directly from the Bangkok Post:

A revamped personal income tax structure aimed at increasing disposable incomes for taxpayers has officially come into effect…The amendment to the Tax Code, published in the Royal Gazette on Jan 27, applies to incomes received from Jan 1, 2017 to be filed in 2018…

It appears that under the restructure individuals will be able to make larger deductions for certain expenses while certain filing requirements have been changed requiring a larger number of individuals to file taxes. Those interested in these developments are strongly encouraged to read the article cited above and consult appropriate professionals in order to be apprised of the posture of a given tax situation.

Finally, The United States Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand has recently increased their official exchange rate to 37-1 (baht to dollars). This change reflects the fact that the Baht has been weakening against the US dollar in recent months and may be a signal that said currency may weaken further. The US Embassy in Thailand utilizes a set exchange rate which provides a level of certainty regarding the cost (in baht terms) of service fees for services provided by the US Embassy personnel.


29th January
2017

For those who have been following the news in recent days it is not new information that President Donald Trump has signed new executive orders with respect to US immigration and travelers from various countries. Effectively, these orders ban certain foreign nationals from obtaining a visa to the USA or entering the USA for at least 90-120 days. Although at present it appears that these orders will only directly impact nationals of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen there are certain aspects of the order which may impact the US immigration process in a broad sense. For example so-called “extreme vetting” protocols which these orders call for may conceivably be implemented by State Department personnel worldwide in connection with the US visa process. Furthermore, it now appears that those who already hold green cards, but are outside of the USA may be turned away by United States Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) or be required to undergo further screening which was not required for reentry to the USA in the past.

Many following this story may be asking themselves: by what authority is the President able to impose these recent restrictions? Pursuant to 8 U.S. Code § 1182:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

It should further be noted that the same statute goes on to mention that the Attorney General has specific powers with regard to the aforementioned issue:

Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Clearly, the President has statutory authority to impose restrictions like those recently created by Trump. The section regarding the power of the Attorney General in this regard is mentioned because in many cases individuals affected by these new rules will be denied the ability to board an airline bound for the USA as airlines and airline personnel do not wish to be the subject of fines and sanctions associated with transporting someone to the USA who has a strong chance of being refused entry.

As of the time of this writing, it remains to be fully seen exactly how these recent executive orders will play out. This is especially true in light of the fact that certain legal actions have resulted in court orders against implementation of these initiatives. Notwithstanding these developments it is very likely that many of the recently enacted restrictions will remain, at least for practical purposes, in place in the foreseeable future.


The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisement. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.