blog-hdr.gif

Integrity Legal

Archive for the ‘Myanmar (Burma) Business’ Category

30th April 2011

Over the years this blogger has seen large numbers of tourists flock to the Kingdom of Thailand as well as the neighboring nations of Laos, the Union of Myanmar (referred to by some as Burma), Malaysia, and the Kingdom of Cambodia. At the same time, this blogger has also witnessed the metamorphosis of some of these tourists into entrepreneurs by remaining in some of these countries (as well as other jurisdictions in Greater Asia such as Indonesia, Vietnam, China, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Nepal, Macau, India, and Sri Lanka; to name only a few) in a business context for many years and; for some, even decades or a whole lifetime. Whatever the circumstances of those Americans Resident Abroad remaining in the region of economies increasingly being labeled by both the mainstream and alternative media outlets by their affiliation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) one thing is clear: the economies of Asia are set to expand at an incredible rate by relative historical comparison. Therefore, it stands to reason that there are likely to be more Americans doing business in these jurisdictions. This state of affairs is occurring at a time when the potential of the internet and the World Wide Web first noted little more than a decade ago is beginning to become fully realized by businesses large and small. As e-commerce becomes an evermore ubiquitous facet of virtually every enterprise’s business strategy it is becoming more clear that many business functions are increasingly being performed by businesses of all sizes online and, in some cases, these businesses are even being maintained from an entrepreneur’s home.

This phenomenon is interesting for this blogger to note from the perspective of an American who is resident in Bangkok, Thailand as the Thai shop-house business model of maintaining a residence and business premises within close proximity has lead to a thriving small business community in the vast metropolis that is Greater Bangkok. This thriving business community, coupled with many of the other positive factors associated with doing business in Thailand, has lead to a vibrant economy that remains conducive to further foreign investment by entrepreneurs and businesses seeking to derive economic benefits both in Thailand and throughout the Asian markets. Of possible importance to Americans resident abroad or those thinking of residing abroad are the issues noted above as well as those associated with ownership of Thai property or Thai real estate especially in the form of a Thai Condominium.

In Thailand, as well as throughout many jurisdictions in Asia, there are restrictions placed upon foreign ownership of real estate. Although there are provisions allowing for foreign ownership of Thai property in many cases it is difficult, if not impossible, for a foreign national to secure freehold title (referred to as Chanote title in Thailand) in Thai real property such as land. However, it may be possible for a foreign national in Thailand, such as an American Citizen, to conveniently secure freehold title to a Thai Condo if the provisions of various laws and regulations on this issue, such as the Thai Condominium Act, are adhered to. Meanwhile, a foreign national who owns a Condo in Thailand may be qualified to receive a Foreign House Registration Booklet (referred to as a Tabien Baan for Thais or a Foreign Tabien Baan, or Yellow Tabien Baan for foreign nationals). Taking the aforementioned factors into consideration, in conjunction with the fact that for American Citizens and American Companies in Thailand there may be benefits pursuant to the provisions of various legal instruments such as the US-Thai Treaty of Amity which may provide the privilege of virtually 100% ownership of a Company in Thailand with “National Treatment” for certain business undertakings, one is left with little doubt that there are tangible legal benefits which could be accrued to the favor of Americans resident in Thailand conducting business in the ASEAN region as well as the regions of Greater Asia. Therefore,  investing in what this blogger would refer to as a “Thai Pad” (which non-literally alludes to the IPad-like gadgets allowing for increasingly easy real time access to the internet as well as the exponentially beneficial combination of privileges accruing to owners of Thai property registered on a Yellow Tabien Baan in conjunction with the advantages which may be had for Americans resident abroad utilizing a Thai company certified under the US-Thai Amity Treaty) could prove to have been prudent by future analysts in both tangible as well as intangible terms.

For related information please see: US Company Registration.

more Comments: 04

27th March 2011

The administration of this blog has been monitoring the evolving situation in the United States of intrastate legislation among some of the sovereign 50 States to reform legal tender laws. There are some recent developments regarding this interesting and legally complex issue that could have ramifications for the global commodities markets, global business community, APEC, ASEAN, Thailand, and China. To quote directly from Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times, in a post on the TruthAlliance.net website entitled “Utah Senate Passes Gold/Silver Legal Tender Law; Awaits Governor Signature“:

The Utah Legislature on Thursday passed a bill allowing gold and silver coins to be used as legal tender in the state — and for the value of their precious metal, not just the face value of the coins.

In a previous posting on this blog it was noted that the lower chamber of Utah’s government, the Utah House of Representatives, had passed the legislation referred to above, but at that time there seemed to be little information pertaining to the reasoning behind the passage of such legislation. The article cited above is quite informative in its coverage of this unfolding situation. To quote further from the aforementioned article:

The legislation directs a state committee to look at whether Utah should recognize an official alternate form of legal tender which could become a path for creating a formal state gold standard.

A spokeswoman for Gov. Gary R. Herbert, a Republican, said he has not yet taken a public stance on the bill.

State Rep. Brad J. Galvez, the chief sponsor of the measure, said he views it as a preliminary step on the path toward securing Utah’s business climate.

“If the dollar continues to fall, what this will do will help stabilize the value of the dollar in Utah, so it helps stabilize the economy,” Mr. Galvez, a Republican, said.

While similar legislation has been proposed in nearly a dozen states, Mr. Galvez said that if Mr. Herbert signs his bill, Utah will be just the second state to official recognize the coins as legal tender. Colorado has recognized gold and silver for decades, he said.[sic]

Those reading this posting are encouraged to click on the hyperlinks above to read the text of this article in full.

Clearly, Utah is not the only American State that is taking monetary measures with an eye toward maintaining a comparative advantage in the national and international business markets along with a healthy State economy. It will be interesting to see what position will ultimately be taken by the Governor of Utah as his stance on the issue has yet to be discerned as of the time of the writing cited above. Issues involving the currency within States can have tremendous ramifications and it would appear that due consideration is being taken.

The article was also notable for this blogger as it elucidated a thought from a legislator in Virgina who is advocating for similar legislation in that State. To quote further from the article by Stephen Dinan:

In Virginia, Delegate Robert G. Marshall, a Republican, successfully pushed through a bill — not yet signed by the governor — that authorizes the state to mint gold, silver and platinum coins. He said that there is probably a good market for collectors who would prefer not to have to buy federally minted coins and said state-minted ones would create a backstop against inflation.

“I’m looking at Congress, and I’m looking at what the Chinese are doing, and I don’t have a lot of confidence in what’s going on there,” Mr. Marshall said. “This is one way where Virginia can help our citizens as a security hedge against the inflationary action of Congress.”

This was an interesting insight for this blogger because it provides hope that more legislators on the State level are looking abroad when formulating policies which are designed to have a direct impact upon the lives of State Citizens. Although the United States Federal government’s enumerated powers provide wide latitude in matters of an international character, some international trends can have a significant economic impact upon the economics of a purely intrastate nature. Therefore, in the world in which we now live even legislators at the State level must have an eye on the evolving business and economic dynamics of countries as far geographically afield as Thailand, China, or any of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Member states in order to make fully informed decisions regarding the enactment of legislation which could impact those within that legislature’s jurisdiction.

As noted in the quotation above, the Governor of Virginia has yet to sign the legislation pending in that State. Therefore, the ultimate outcome remains to be seen, but one thing remains clear: few lawmakers are taking this legislation lightly as evidenced by the alacrity of these legislatures’ votes and the taciturn position of these States’ respective Governors.

This issue is coming to the foreground of the national political spectrum at a time when the legal issues surrounding the issue of same sex marriage and interstate Full Faith and Credit Clause interpretation versus the Federal-State sovereign relationship in the context of same sex marriages legalized and solemnized pursuant to the laws of sovereign American States is coming to the attention of the United States Federal Appellate Courts in the form of cases which have the potential to directly contravene the provisions of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA). In an American Immigration context, Federal legislators such as Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York have continued to push legislation such as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) which would allow the United States Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State to adjudicate petitions for same sex “permanent partners” of United States Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents in the same manner as different sex couples.  How the issues associated with legal tender reform and the issues associated with Full Faith and Credit for State recognized same sex marriages will be resolved remains to be seen, but clearly such issues will remain noteworthy as time goes on.

For information related to these issues please see: US Visa Thailand or Same Sex Visa.

more Comments: 04

26th March 2011

Those following this blog with any frequency may have by this point noticed that the blog has been monitoring the crisis situation in Japan in some depth while failing entirely to provide any information regarding the Earthquake that recently occurred in Shan State, Myanmar (Burma). The administration apologizes for the oversight. To quote directly from the official website of the Montreal Gazette at MontrealGazette.com:

YANGON. A strong earthquake struck Burma near the Thai border on Thursday, killing at least two people, including a child, officials from both countries said, with shaking felt across the region.

Terrified residents fled their homes, tall buildings swayed and hospitals and schools were evacuated after tremors spread as far away as Hanoi, parts of China and Bangkok, almost 800 kilometres from the epicentre.

The administration of this blog highly encourages readers to click on the hyperlinks above to learn more about the recent Earthquake in Myanmar. This blogger was personally told by multiple Thai residents of Bangkok that tremors could supposedly be felt as far away from the Thai-Burmese border as Nonthaburi province near the Bangkok Metropolitan Area.
Unfortunately there is a tragic side to these events since the recent Earthquake has taken its toll upon the Shan State residents. To quote directly from the official website of The Irawaddy at Irrawaddy.org:
Local relief workers in eastern State Sate said on Saturday that the death toll from the powerful earthquake that shook Shan State on Thursday night could very likely rise to more than 150. Burma’s state media reported on Saturday that 73 people had died as a result of the 7.0 magnitude tremor and its subsequent aftershocks on Thursday and Friday.[sic]
Again, the administration encourages readers to click upon the hyperlinks above to read the full story in detail.
This Earthquake’s human toll is truly disheartening and it seems likely that there will be political and economic ramifications from this event that could result in hardship for people near the Earthquake’s epicenter. In and of itself, the Earthquake in Burma is unlikely to have the same global impact as that which occurred in Japan. However, this Earthquake coupled with the economic and, sadly, nuclear fallout caused by the Japanese Earthquake could compound economic and business uncertainties and possibly contribute to what would appear to be increasingly rising commodities prices.
The Earthquake in Myanmar is notable in the context of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) since Myanmar is a Member of that organization along with neighboring Thailand. It will be interesting to see if the recent Earthquake will have any impact upon the proposed high speed rail line that is to be brought online to connect Southern China with Laos, Thailand and ultimately the other ASEAN member states.
For related information please see: Asia-Pacific region or ecommerce.
more Comments: 04

26th March 2011

Those who have been following this blog with any regularity will likely have noticed that the administration has been attempting to follow the developments unfolding throughout the world as a consequence of the recent nuclear crisis in Japan. One way of monitoring the global response to radiation contamination is through following developing regulatory policies regarding the importation of Japanese products by countries outside of Japan.  In a recent posting on this blog the administration noted the fact that the authorities in many member nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) had imposed restrictions upon imported Japanese foodstuffs. The same could also be said for some member economies of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum.  To quote directly from the website FocusTaiwan.tw:

Taipei, March 25 (CNA) Taiwan suspended imports of food products Friday from five Japanese prefectures, including Fukushima, where a nuclear power plant was damaged by a powerful earthquake and subsequent tsunami March 11.

Minister of Health Chiu Wen-ta said all safety inspections of food entering the country from Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma and Chiba — which have all reported widespread radioactive contamination — had been suspended, effectively barring all entry of food from those areas.

The administration of this blog highly recommends that readers click upon the two hyperlinks directly above this citation to read the entire article. As evidence continues to show an increasingly distressing situation in Japan it was also noted that Mainland Chinese officials have implemented new policies regarding food imports from Japan. To quote directly from the website DailyTimes.com.pk:

BEIJING: China banned imports of some Japanese food products on Friday amid fears of radiation contamination, hours after announcing that two Japanese travellers who had flown into an eastern city were found to have radiation levels well above safety limits.[sic]

China joins a growing list of countries that have stopped imports of some foodstuffs from Japan. The ban covers dairy, aquatic and vegetable products as well as fruit from the five Japanese prefectures of Fukushima, Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaraki, Chiba, China’s quality watchdog, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) said in a statement…

Readers are highly encouraged to click on the hyperlinks above to read this enlightening piece in full. Clearly Chinese officials are joining their counterparts around the world in a trend of placing increasingly stringent restrictions on Japanese imports. More importantly, it would seem that authorities in China have also reported that two Japanese travelers showed signs of alarming levels of radiation upon arrival from Tokyo.  To quote further from the aforementioned piece:

Separately, the quality watchdog said that two Japanese travellers who flew into China’s eastern city of Wuxi from Tokyo on Wednesday had radiation levels that “seriously exceeded the limit”. [sic]

Clearly, as evidenced by the quotations above, the Chinese authorities are apprised of what appears to be an increasingly serious situation in Japan and are taking appropriate measures.

As the ramifications of this tragedy come into clearer focus concerns mount as to the long term consequences of the Japanese crisis. Meanwhile, concerned people around the world continue to watch as the Japanese people struggle to overcome what could prove to be the most daunting crisis ever to befall a modern nation-state.

For related information please see: business in China or business in Taiwan.

more Comments: 04

24th March 2011

The tragic situation in Japan (a country recently plagued by Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Volcanoes, and finally Nuclear Meltdown)  is apparently causing other nations in East Asia and Southeast Asia to rethink their options with regard to the proliferation of nuclear power plants. A recent posting on the website AsiaOne.com discussed some of these issues in some detail. To quote directly from the website AsiaOne.com:

Singapore – Japan’s nuclear crisis is likely to prompt Southeast Asian states to look more carefully at their plans to tap atomic energy for power generation, the head of the regional bloc said Monday.

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) secretary-general Surin Pitsuwan said Japan’s struggle to prevent a reactor meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear power plant will have a “psychological” impact on some ASEAN members.

“They will continue to explore, but I think the sense of urgency will certainly be contained a little bit,” Surin told reporters on the sidelines of a regional economic conference in Singapore.

The administration of this blog highly encourages readers to click on the links above to read more of this article.

Clearly, a disaster of the magnitude of the events unfolding in Japan can have a tremendous “psychological” effect around the world, but what is interesting about the above quotation is the fact that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a regional organizations that is becoming increasingly important in geopolitical matters, seems to be uniformly ambivalent towards nuclear power as of the time of this writing. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Thailand, an important member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), is rethinking its position on the issue of nuclear power. To quote directly from Eco-Business.com:

Thailand has frozen its plans to build its own nuclear power plants in the wake of the ongoing nuclear crisis in Japan following a series of meltdowns at the quake-hit power complex in Fukushima.

Thai Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban announced yesterday that the government would indefinitely halt all plans to build nuclear facilities in the Kingdom.

Again readers are highly encouraged to click on the links above to read more from this posting.

In this blogger’s personal opinion, this decision to “freeze” plans for a Thai nuclear plant is both prudent and necessary. The decision is prudent because it provides the Thai government and people the opportunity to watch the events in Japan unfold. This will provide the Thais with the opportunity to see the extent of the problem in Japan and this opportunity will allow Thai authorities to take a firsthand look at the possible dangers inherent in constructing and maintaining a nuclear facility. Such measures are necessary because failure to be prudent could be costly later, as evidenced by the situation in Japan. This nuclear disaster in Japan is obviously no one’s “fault,” but perhaps failure to take into consideration the fact that Japan, and the reactors present therein, is situated upon one of the most tectonically active locations on Earth may help to explain the nuclear disaster. At this time, fixing the blame for this tragedy should not be at the forefront of people’s minds as the brave Citizens of Japan struggle to overcome this situation, but evaluating the proliferation of nuclear facilities in the ASEAN with a critical eye may help avoid such tragedies in the Southeast Asia of the future.

As economic activity in the ASEAN region, China, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia expands it stands to reason that energy needs will remain an acute concern for the business community as well as governmental authorities, but such considerations would appear to be being weighed in light of the recent events in Japan, as well they should be.

For related information please see: business in China.

more Comments: 04

11th February 2011

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that many of the Stock Exchanges around the world are in open discussion regarding possible merger. It would appear that many of the companies which operate various bourses around the globe are keen to exploit the efficiencies and opportunities which could arise as a result of multi-jurisdictional trading. This is even true in the case of the United States of America as the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) could be merged with an exchange in Frankfurt, Germany. The official website of America’s National Public Radio has more information regarding this issue. To quote directly from NPR.org:

The company that operates the New York Stock Exchange could soon be acquired by a European company in a deal that could be announced as soon as next week.

NYSE Euronext, the company that owns the New York Stock Exchange and stock and derivatives markets throughout Europe, has confirmed it’s in advanced talks with Deutsche Boerse, which owns the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. The deal would create the world’s largest financial exchange, with headquarters in both Europe and the U.S.

Those reading this blog are encouraged to go to the posting noted above to read the full story.

It should be noted that the United States is not the only country whose stock market is contemplating merger with that of a foreign jurisdiction. It recently was announced that the Canadian Stock Exchange (TMX) and the London Stock Exchange (LSE) are in talks about entering deals to merge those two securities exchange platforms. The Financial Times has been reporting on this state of affairs over the past several days. It would appear that the initial enthusiasm that erupted from the announcement that the Canadian and London Exchanges may be merging was overshadowed by the more recent announcement regarding the NYSE and the German Bourse. To quote directly from the official website of the Financial Times, FT.com:

The limelight may have rapidly moved to the US and Germany but those behind the merger of the London Stock Exchange and TMX, operator of Canada’s largest bourse, insist it was the right deal to do…

The deal, which will create a company worth more than $5bn (£3.1bn), is intended to create the world’s leading cash equities platform for mining companies, as countries including Brazil, China and Mongolia look to exploit their natural resources.

Those seeking further information on this topic are well advised to visit the Financial Times posting noted above.

This blogger was interested when reading the above cited story because the country of Mongolia would appear interested in having their business interests represented on a British-Canadian exchange rather than an exchange in Asia. Mongolia’s desire to acquire investment capital may have been “trumped” by worries that listing on an exchange in Asia would run counter to the country’s strategic long term geopolitical interests.

It should be noted that the American, Canadian, British, and German stock exchanges are not the only ones which have been discussing possible merger. In fact, the Australian Securities Exchange and the Singapore Stock Exchange have been working out the details of a merger for months. The announcements from the North American, British, and European exchanges regarding possible merger may be a catalyst for the Australian and Singaporean exchanges to conclude their merger discussions more quickly. To quote directly from a posting on the Sydney Morning Herald‘s official website SMH.com.au:

A RUSH of merger proposals among the world’s biggest stock exchanges over the past two days is expected to increase pressure on Canberra to approve Singapore Stock Exchange’s $8.4 billion move on the Australian Securities Exchange.

But with the trans-Atlantic deals designed with an eye to overcoming political concerns, Singapore could be forced to restructure its proposal to give the ASX a greater role in any tie-up.

The administration of this web log encourages readers to visit the posting cited above in order to get the full details of the proposed merger between the Singapore Stock Exchange and the Australia Securities Exchange.

There have been a great many announcements regarding stock exchanges in Southeast Asia. Recently, it was announced that the small Southeast Asian nation of Laos was opening a stock exchange to trade Lao securities. Apparently, the Laos Stock Exchange has been operating smoothly since its opening. Meanwhile, it has also been noted that the Southeast Asian nation of Myanmar (also referred to by its former name, Burma) is contemplating the establishment of a Burmese Stock Exchange. However, it remains to be seen whether or not this idea will actually come to fruition as Myanmar remains the subject of sanctions and there are many who believe that the country must deal with humanitarian issues prior to undertaking economic programs such as the establishment of a Burmese Bourse. In fact, there are some who argue that so long as Western sanctions remain imposed against Burma that it will be unlikely that an exchange will be opened in that country. That said, anything could happen and the actual establishment of a Burmese stock exchange remains to be seen.

More concrete plans for the opening of a stock exchange appear to be taking shape in the Southeast Asian nation of Cambodia as further steps have been taken toward the proposed opening of a Cambodian Securities Exchange in mid-2011. The following was quoted directly from the official website of the Phnom Penh Post, PhnomPenhPost.com:

PHNOM Penh Securities opened its doors yesterday, becoming the third of seven approved underwriters to open ahead of the planned launch of the Cambodian stock exchange later this year.

Chairman of the firm, Kay Vat, said a key focus of the business would be guiding foreign firms planning to invest in the Kingdom’s listed companies.

Those wishing to learn more about the proposed Cambodian Stock Exchange are well advised to visit the Phnom Penh Post website noted above.

In other postings on this blog it was noted that the Cambodian Exchange is set to commence trading on or around June of this year. At present, there does not appear to be any talk of a merger between the Thai Stock Exchange (often referred to as the SET) and that of any other nation. Furthermore, Chinese officials do not seem particularly predisposed to any type of multi-jurisdictional merger between those exchanges operating in China and those operating in other countries. However, those following this issue should resist the urge to completely rule out such a possibility, but it seems unlikely in the near future as Thai and Chinese officials do not seem poised to make such an announcement.

Stock Exchanges remain an effective tool for countries wishing to attract foreign capital as many foreign investors enjoy the transparency and greater efficiency that comes from trading on an open exchange. That said, the impact from the  “ripple effect” that may result from the merger of the Canadian, American, British, and German Exchanges remain to be seen as the effect of such mergers could reverberate in the economies that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

American individuals or American companies conducting business abroad should note the fact that all Americans (both natural persons and corporate entities) are required to adhere to the provisions of the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is a piece of legislation which attempts to regulate the activity of Americans abroad in a business context. The act is designed to decrease the incidents of graft and corruption perpetrated by Americans doing business abroad. American businesses and individuals investing or doing business abroad may find the assistance of an attorney useful when attempting to comply with the FCPA in an international context.

For related information please see: Thailand Company or US Company Registration.

more Comments: 04

1st February 2011

In recent postings on this web log the administration has posted news and information pertaining to the ongoing situation in the Southeast Asian nation of Myanmar (also referred to as Burma). In a recent report, it was noted that the Burmese government was discussing the idea of setting up a stock exchange. Meanwhile, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has informally called for an end to the American (as well as international) sanctions being imposed upon Myanmar. To quote directly from a recent posting on the Voice of America’s official website:

The United States is among a handful of countries that have imposed targeted economic sanctions on those most responsible for denying democracy and disregarding human rights in Burma. As the time approaches for the parliaments to convene, some of Burma’s neighbors have called on the West to lift sanctions. They say U.S. policy hampers important areas of trade, prevents investment and technology from helping to develop Burma’s hard-pressed ethnic regions, and hurts the Burmese people.

The United States is deeply concerned about the plight of ordinary citizens of Burma. But it is the regime that is responsible for the country’s dire economic situation. The record is clear on how the military regime has mismanaged the economy, institutionalized corruption and plundered valuable national resources for private gain.

Our two nations have been in talks about improving relations since 2009 and we will continue to engage the government on our mutual concerns. Until the government undertakes fundamental change in Burma, including releasing the more than 2,100 political prisoners and beginning a meaningful and time-bound dialogue with the democratic opposition and ethnic minorities, U.S. sanctions will remain in place.

The issue of Human Rights in Burma is not intended to be the topic of this posting as this blogger sincerely does not feel qualified to address such issues. Exploitation, murder, and human rights abuses in Burma (Myanmar) are all issues which should concern anyone living in modern times, but there is a rather strong argument in favor of lifting sanctions such as these as there are those who would argue that these sanctions fail in their objective and may actually worsen the plight of the common people who are sometimes more adversely impacted by such measures than are those at whom the sanctions were originally aimed. In a piece written on this issue by Leon T. Hadar entitled U.S. Sanctions Against Burma: A Failure on All Fronts these issues were more eloquently elaborated:

The U.S. policy of imposing unilateral trade and investment sanctions against Burma has proven to be a failure on all fronts. By forcing U.S. firms to disengage from Burma, that policy has harmed American economic interests and done nothing to improve the living conditions or human rights of the people of Burma.

Sanctions have denied Burmese citizens the benefits of increased investment by American multinational companies–investment that brings technoloygy, better working conditions, and Western ideas.[sic]

State and local sanctions against Burma have compounded the problem caused by federal sanctions and raised troubling constitutional questions.

Unilateral sanctions have alienated our allies in the region and strengthened the hand of China but achieved none of the stated foreign policy aims. If Washington had allowed the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to take the lead in setting policy toward Burma, the United States could have enjoyed a “win-win” situation–better relations with our allies and more influence over the regime in Rangoon.

As an alternative to the failed policy of sanctions, the United States should allow U.S. companies to freely trade with and investment in Burma. A pro-business approach to engagement would more effectively promote political, civil, and economic freedom around the world. Congress should enact legislation requiring a full accounting of the cost of sanctions and explicit justification on national security grounds before they can be imposed.

It has always been this blogger’s personal opinion that the Burmese sanctions were neither well promulgated nor well executed as the imposition of sanctions has resulted in a situation in which the people at the lowest echelons of Burmese society are not able to enjoy the technological and monetary benefits that come with increased investment and the increased economic activity springing therefrom. The policy reasons underlying the sanctions against Burma would seem to originate in a belief that such sanctions will result in better conditions for the dispossessed currently living in Burma. Although this is pure speculation, it would seem that there is at least some room for reasonable people to disagree about the effects of the Burmese sanctions. Hopefully increased dialogue on this issue will result in new strategies which can be implemented to the benefit of the Burmese people and those seeking investment opportunities in Southeast Asia.

For related information please see: US Visa Myanmar.

more Comments: 04

25th January 2011

The administration of this blog recently noticed an article from the Reuters news agency in which the Chief Executive Officer of General Electric was commenting upon the economic situation in China and how this impacts the relationship between the United States of America and Peoples’ Republic of China in both the economic and political spheres. To quote directly from the Reuters News Service:

(Reuters) – For Jeff Immelt, the CEO of General Electric (GE.N), the 130 year-old American industrial behemoth, the financial crisis marked the end of the age of America’s economic dominance.

This blogger has noticed that there seems to be a level of pessimism regarding the American economy. Although it is currently going through economic turbulence, and has been for a while, the US economy, in this blogger’s opinion; remains one of best countries in the world for trade and economic activity. Those doing business in the USA may enjoy the benefits that come from the American financial, economic, and physical infrastructure. Hopefully, the optimism for which America has, in the past, been noted for will return once the economy returns to an “even keel”. Reuters continues:

But Mr. Immelt said the future will be different. For the next 25 years, he said, the American consumer “is not going to be the engine of global growth. It is going to be the billion people joining the middle class in Asia, it is going to be what the resource-rich countries do with their newfound wealth of high oil prices. That’s the game.”

A lot of that game will be played in China. At a moment when it is compulsory on the American right to pay homage to the exceptionalism of the United States, Mr. Immelt, a lifelong Republican, is matter-of-fact about China’s inevitable rise.

The interesting piece of information that this blogger noted in the aforementioned article was the fact that the G.E. CEO took notice of the fact that the middle class is growing rapidly in Asia. The thought of an Asian middle class numbering 1 billion or more is truly staggering when one takes into account the economic impact of such growth. As Asians in general become more affluent the side effects will likely be increased trade and economic activity as these newly minted members of the middle class use their new found wealth to make purchases of property, goods, and services (in Asia, the EU, UK, and the United States). The most poignant line of this Reuters article, in this blogger’s opinion was:

“It is going to be the biggest economy in the world,” Mr. Immelt said of China. “The only question is when.”

There is little doubt that China has an incredible capacity for growth and those looking international investment or business opportunities are well advised to research the Chinese market. That said, China does not represent the only country in Asia which has economic opportunities that are becoming more readily available to investors and entrepreneurs due to globalization. The Kingdom of Thailand, a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), has investment opportunities in the form of Thai Property, Thai Real Estate, and Thai businesses. Furthermore, for Americans conducting business in Thailand can prove profitable especially since the US-Thai Treaty of Amity allows Americans to own virtually 100% of a Thai Company with Amity Treaty certification (sometimes referred to as an Amity Company).

Meanwhile, the landlocked country of Laos recently opened a Lao Securities Exchange in an effort to raise capital through equity investment. The Kingdom of Cambodia recently announced that a Cambodian Stock Exchange is to be unveiled in mid-2011 while recent reports have noted that Burmese officials hope to be in the process of creating a Myanmar Stock Exchange as well. Such developments remain to be fully realized, but such examples clearly indicate that Mainland China is not the only “game in town” when it comes to investment opportunities and economic growth in Asia.

For related information please see: US Company Registration.

more Comments: 04

24th January 2011

It recently came to this blogger’s attention, via the print media in Bangkok, Thailand; that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), along with other organizations and individuals, are calling for an end to the economic sanctions being imposed against the Union of Myanmar (sometimes interchangeably referred to as Burma). While researching this issue online this blogger came upon the following quotation from Rttnews.com:

An informal meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has called for the lifting of economic sanctions against the military regime of Myanmar.

The meeting, held on the Indonesian island of Lombok, made the call citing “significant” political progress made in the south-east Asian country.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, whose country holds the rotating chair of the ten-nation organization, told reporters: “We believe that the recent development needs to be responded by the international community, especially in order to ensure that the economic development in Myanmar can take place.”

He says ASEAN Ministers feel that the recent long-awaited Myanmar elections, which he described as “conducive and transparent, and the release of Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi warranted a positive international response.

The lifting of the sanctions against Myanmar still remains to be seen, but in the wake of the announcement from ASEAN the Straits Times official website is reporting that authorities in Myanmar are taking steps toward creating a stock exchange in Myanmar. To quote directly from the Straits Times website StraitsTimes.com:

BANGKOK – MYANMAR is in talks with South Korea’s bourse operator about opening a stock market, the latest in a series of steps by its military rulers aimed at drawing much-needed foreign capital to the country.

Korea Exchange is already involved in running the newly opened Laos Securities Exchange and is setting up a long-delayed stock market in Cambodia, which is due to open in July. Both are joint ventures with the respective governments.

In previous postings on this blog, the administration has discussed the unveiling of a Stock Exchange in Laos and the announcement that a Cambodian Securities Exchange is set to be opened in mid-2011. In the case of Myanmar, it would appear as though any plans for the eventual creation of a Myanmar securities exchange are still tentative as can be gathered from a further quote in the Straits Times posting:

A spokesman for Korea Exchange in Seoul said representatives had visited Myanmar twice. ‘But nothing has been decided,’ the official said.

Although the opening of a Myanmar Securities Exchange is not a foregone conclusion, there are many who can cite the myriad economic benefits that would accrue as a result of such a step. Furthermore, there are those who would argue that creation of economic opportunities in Myanmar would be beneficial for all Citizens of Myanmar based upon a sort of “rising tide raises all ships” logic. To quote further from the Straits Times:

Myanmar is rich in natural resources but its development has been held back by five decades of economic mismanagement under military dictators and by Western sanctions.

But reforms are under way. The authorities have privatised hundreds of state assets in the past year and are seeking to expand the banking, telecommunications, shipping and agricultural sectors. — REUTERS

Myanmar is truly a cornucopia of natural resources and economic opportunity, but at the time of this writing many nations, including the United States of America, have sanctions against this Southeast Asian nation which prohibit certain forms of commercial activity. There are some who argue that such sanctions actually exacerbate the plight of impoverished Myanmar Citizens. Such an argument generally postulates that easing of foreign trade restrictions, and the economic benefits which would likely arise from such a state of affairs, would accrue to the benefit of many of the market actors in Myanmar, many of whom live in poverty. Under such a theory, economic benefits would not necessarily exclusively accrue to the upper echelon of Myanmar as the less affluent would likely benefit, albeit indirectly, from the infusion of foreign capital, trade goods, intellectual property, and the further economic activity arising therefrom.

Even though a securities exchange in Myanmar may be merely in the discussion phase and is a long way from being created, those interested in doing business in Myanmar, or any other country in Southeast Asia, should take note of the information above as there are many who would argue that Myanmar will likely play a critical role in regional and global economics as well as trade.

For related information please see: US Company Registration, US Visa Myanmar, or Laos Securities Exchange.

more Comments: 04

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.