Integrity Legal

In a peculiar series of events, it would appear that some of the various United States are pondering the re-introduction of precious metals as a means and method of paying State government fees and other fees related to matters arising in an intrastate context. It would appear as though the Commonwealth of Virginia is taking the lead in this matter by proposing measures which could eventually lead to the State government adopting precious metals as the means of payment for State government services.

To quote directly from Jason Hamlin on the website marketoracle.co.uk:

In what could be the financial shot heard around the world, the state of Virginia is considering the establishment of a joint subcommittee to study whether the Commonwealth should adopt a currency such as gold or silver to serve as an alternative to the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve System in the event of a major breakdown of the Federal Reserve System.

This blogger found the proposed Virginia legislation using the Virginia.gov website. In order to understand where the States derive their authority to adopt precious metals for purposes of intrastate governmental fees it may be best to quote language from the proposed legislation directly from the Virginia.gov website:

WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States in Lane County v. Oregon, 74 U.S. (7 Wallace) 71, 76-78 (1869), and Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108, 111 U.S. 701, 706 (1884), has ruled that the States may adopt whatever currency they desire for the purposes of performing their sovereign governmental functions, even to the extent of adopting gold and silver coin for those purposes while refusing to employ a currency not redeemable in gold or silver coin that Congress has designated “legal tender”;

Those who understand the United States Constitution will no doubt be aware of the fact that the power to regulate intrastate affairs matters is not derived from the Federal government (nor the Supreme Court), but from the inherent sovereignty of the States themselves. The Supreme Court’s opinion on the matter is used to provide laypeople with insight regarding the Supreme Court’s position on this issue. As of yet, this legislation is still pending. However, those interested in this matter are well advised to check out the links above to find out more about the actual provisions of this legislation and the ramifications thereof.

It would appear that Virginia is not the only American State to ponder the adoption of precious metals as an alternative payment method for intrastate matters. Recently it came to this blogger’s attention that the state of Utah has seen similar proposed legislation. To quote directly from an article by Alex Newman on the website thenewamerican.com:

Under the proposed legislation, introduced late last year for the upcoming legislative session, the state government would be authorized to collect and return taxes and fees in precious metals. Additionally, Utah’s government could use gold and silver in connection with any intrastate transaction. But of course, it would be entirely up to citizens whether they preferred to use precious-metals coins or U.S. dollars…

In 2009, Federal legislation (H.R. 4248: Free Competition in Currency Act of 2009) was introduced by Representative Ron Paul which would have provided more currency options to those in the jurisdiction of the United States of America. However, this legislation failed to be enacted. To quote directly from govtrack.us:

This bill never became law. This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven’t passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session.

As the United States of America is composed of 50 sovereign States as well as the Federal government the Federal legislature would be required to pass legislation regarding currency usage for matters falling under the Federal bailiwick, but State matters are dealt with exclusively by State legislatures. Clearly, the ultimate outcome for State legislation such as that noted above has yet to be determined. However, it would appear that there is more support for adopting precious metals for payment of government fees at the State level compared to the Federal level. That said, the future of both issues is uncertain.

Should legislation similar to that noted above be adopted by one or more of the United States, then this could have tremendous implications for the political-economies that compose the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or are geographically located within Greater Asia. Companies from Asia doing business in the USA may need to make some currency adjustments should business interests compel presence in a State which has adopted specie or precious metals as a method of paying State government costs and fees.

For related information please see: Stock Exchange Mergers

Tags: adoption of precious metals, currency, Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank, Federal Reserve Notes, Fiat Currency, Free Competition in Currency Act of 2009, Gold, Gold bullion, Gold Standard, H.R. 4248, Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108, HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 557, interstate commerce, intrastate commerce, intrastate currency legislation, Lane County v. Oregon, Sound Money, specie, State currency legislation, States' Rights, The Sound Money Act, The Utah Specie Tender Act of 2011, Utah, Virginia
Posted in American Business, Cambodia Business, China Business, Laos Business, States' Rights, Thailand Business, US Constitution | No Comments »

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.

Tags: ASEAN, ASsociation of Southeast ASian Nations, ASX, Australian Securities Exchange, Bourse News, Cambodian stock exchange, Canadian Stock Exchange, Deutsche Boerse, German Stock Exchange, Global Bourse News, Global Stock Exchange News, London Stock Exchnage, LSE, New York Stock Exchange, NYSE Euronext, SGX, Singapore Stock Exchange, Stock Exchnage News, TMX, World Bourse News, World Stock Exchange News
Posted in Cambodia Business, China Business, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), Laos Business, Myanmar (Burma) Business, Thailand Business, US Business | 1 Comment »

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.

Tags: American Amity Treaty, American Amity Treaty Thailand, Amity Company, Amity Treaty Company, Burma Stock Exchange, Cambodia Business, Cambodia Securities Exchange, Cambodia Stock Exchange, China Business, China Economic Growth, G.E. CEO, General Electric, Jeff Immelt, Lao Securities Exchange, Lao Stock Exchange, Laos Business, Myanmar Securities Exchange, Myanmar Stock Exchange, Thai Company, Thailand Business, Thailand company, US Amity Treaty Thailand, US-Thai Treaty of Amity
Posted in Amity Treaty, Cambodia Business, China Business, Laos Business, Myanmar (Burma) Business, News, Opinion, Thailand Business, Thailand company, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate, US Business, US Company Registration | 1 Comment »

เมื่อเร็วๆนี้ มีเรื่องราวที่น่าสนใจว่า คณะกรรมการกำกับหลักทรัพย์ในสหรัฐอเมริการายงานถึงการสอบสวนการฝ่าฝืนพระราชบัญญัติการปฏิบัติการทุจริตต่อต่างชาติ อ้างโดยตรงจากบล็อกที่เขียนโดย แอชบรีย์ โจนส์ในเว็บไซต์ของนิตยสารวอลล์ สตรีท wsj.com

คณะกรรมการกำกับหลักทรัพย์กำลังสอบสวนธนาคารและภาคเอกชนที่กำลังฝ่าฝืนกฎหมายเกี่ยวกับสินบนในการจัดการกับกองทุนเพื่อความมั่งคั่งตามที่ประชาชนคุ้นเคยกันเป็นอย่างดี คลิกที่นี่เพื่อดูบทความที่ไดออนเน่ เซียร์ซี่และแลนเดลล์เขียนในWSJ และคลิกที่นี่เพื่อตขิดตามเรื่องราวของ NYT และคลิกที่นี่เพื่อติดตามเรื่องราวของบลูมเบิร์ก

ตามที่ WSJ และคณะกรรมการกำกับหลักทรัพย์SEC ส่งจดหมายถามข้อสงสัยต่อธนาคารเช่น ซิตี้กรุ๊ปและภาคเอกชน  เช่นแบล็กสโตนกรุ๊ป แม้ว่าในจดหมายไม่ได้ระบุถึงข้อกล่าวหาในเรื่องสินบน พวกเขายังคงเรียกร้องที่จะให้บริษัทเก็บรักษาเอกสารและถามถึงการจัดการบริษัทกับกองทุนเพื่อความมั่งคั่ง

ผู้ที่ไม่คุ้นเคยกับ FCPA ควรจะทราบไว้ว่า มีบทบัญญัติตามกฎหมายเบื้องต้นที่จะจัดการกับสินบนและการคอร์รัปชั่นของเจ้าหน้าที่ต่างประเทศ ชาวอเมริกันบางคนนั้นอยู่ภายใต้ความผิดพลาดของบริษัทและบุคคลที่ดำเนินการนอกเขตแดนสหรัฐอเมริกาและมีสิทธิที่เกี่ยวข้องกับสินบน ในความเป็นจริงแล้ว มีกรณีศึกษาที่ สหรัฐอเมริกาพยายามที่จะร่างกฎหมายเพื่อทำลายและลงโทษการกระทำเช่นว่านั้น เมื่อกฎหมายผ่านการพิจารณานั้นปรากฎถึงวัตถุประสงค์อย่างชัดแจ้งที่จะลงโทษการกระทำเช่นนี้ในต่างประเทศ (หรือบริษัทที่ทำธุรกิจในต่างประเทศ) อย่างไรก็ตามจากสถานการณ์ที่กล่าวถึงดูเหมือนว่า จะถูกแนะนำภายใต้การสอบสวน(อย่างน้อยที่สุดคือ บางส่วน)ภายในเขตแดนของสหรัฐอเมริกา อ้างจากข้อความในบล็อกที่เขียนใน wsj.com

จดหมายที่จะผูกพันการสอบสวนของอุตสาหกรรมการธนาคารตามพระราชบัญญัติการปฏิบัติคอร์รัปชั่นของชาวต่างชาติ ทนายความที่เชี่ยวชาญกับการสอบสวนครั้งก่อนๆของอุตสาหกรรม ลูกจ้างชาวต่างชาติผู้ที่ทำงานกับกองทุนเพื่อความมั่งคั่งอาจจะรวมถึงเจ้าหน้าที่ของรัฐและรวมถึง FCPA ผู้เชี่ยวชาญทางกฎหมายกล่าว

แต่มันเป็นที่ปรากฏอย่างชัดเจนว่า ไม่มีผู้ที่จะถูกกล่าวหาอย่างเป็นทางการในข้อหาใดๆต่อ FCPA นอกจากนี้มันควรจะเป็นที่ปรากฏอย่างชัดแจ้งว่า จนกระทั่งเวลานั้น คู่กรณีมักให้การ หรือถูกกล่าวหาว่าการละเมิดของ FCPAในสายตาของกฎหมายพวกเขาเป็นผู้บริสุทธิ์

พระราชบัญญัติการคอรรัปชั่นของชาวต่างชาติเป็นงานชิ้นสำคัญของการร่างกฎหมายของชาวอเมริกันและบริษัทอเมริกัน ตามบทบัญญัติของFCPA ช่าวอเมริกันแต่ละคนและนิติบุคคลอื่นนั้นไม่อยู่ในการเกี่ยวข้องกับการกระทำเกี่ยวกับสินบนหรือสิทธิอื่นๆหรือ การคอร์รัปชั่น คำร้องของFCPA ต้องได้รับการพิจารณาตามข้อเท็จจริงในแต่ละคดี ดังนั้นหลักการปฏิบัติทางธุรกิจต่างประเทศอาจจะเห็นได้จากความเห็นของผู้เชี่ยวชาญที่มีประสบการณ์ในการจัดการเกี่ยวกับคดีเกี่ยวกับธุรกิจและกฎหมายในเขตอำนาจศาลนอกสหรัฐอเมริกาสามารถให้สิทธิประโยชน์โดยการให้มุมมองที่มีลักษณะเฉพาะและแง่มุมในแบบพิธีการและขั้นตอนขององค์กรรัฐบาลและเจ้าหน้าที่ต่างแดนในขณะที่ยังคงรักษาความเข้าใจของทนายความอเมริกันของ FCPA

ตัวอย่างเช่น ราชอาณาจักรไทยมีระบบกฎหมายที่แตกต่างจากสหรัฐอเมริกา ในขณะเดียวกัน แวดวงธุรกิจในประเทศไทยนั้นก็แตกต่างไปจากสหรัฐอเมริกา ข้อเท็จจริงคือ พลเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกาและบริษัทอเมริกัน มีความพยายามที่จะดำเนินธุรกิจซึ่งทีแนวความคิดของการจัดการธุรกิจอย่างมีประสิทธิภาพในขณะเดียวกันก็ยังคงเป็นไปตามกฎหมายอย่างเช่น พระราชบัญญัติการปฏิบัติคอร์รัปชั่นของชาวต่างชาติ เช่นเดียวกันกับระบบกฎหมาย วัฒนธรรม ประเพณี และการปฏิบัติทางการค้าของหลายๆชาติในเอเชียสามารถที่จะพิสูจน์ข้อสงสัยหลายๆอย่างของผู้ที่จะดำเนินธุรกิจในบริบทของการเป็นแบบ “ตะวันตก” มากกว่า ข้อเท็จจริงคือ FCPA เป็นการร่างกฎหมายที่เข้มข้นกับบริษัทอเมริกันและบุคคลที่จะต้องปฏิบัติตาม ในบางกรณี การที่จะให้บริการทางกฎหมายในการช่วยเหลือให้ความเข้าใจFCPA และวิธีการที่จะประนีประนอมสามารถพิสูจน์ถึงสิทธิประโยชน์ทั้งบุคคลตามธรรมชาติและนิติบุคคล

ผู้ที่หวังว่า ข้อซักถามก่อนหน้านี้สามารถที่จะพิสูจน์สิ่งที่ไร้ประโยชน์ เนื่องจากข้อเท็จจริงต่างๆไม่ได้มีการละเมิดเกิดขึ้น สิ่งที่พึงระลึกถึงคือ ถ้ามีการละเมิด FCPA เกิดขึ้นต่อจากนั้นดูเหมือนว่า มีแนวโน้มที่จะมีองค์กรเช่นคณะกรรมการกำกับตลาดหลักทรัพย์สามารถที่จะเปิดเผยข้อเท็จจริง

ข้อมูลที่เกี่ยวข้องกับ บริษัทไทย หรือ การจัดตั้งบริษัทอเมริกัน

To read this information in English please see: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Tags: FCPA, FCPA Thailand, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, กฎระเบียบการทุจริตของอเมริกัน, กฎหมายการเงินอเมริกัน, กฎหมายจัดตั้งบริษัทอเมริกัน, กฎหมายทุจริตของอเมริกา, กฎหมายธุรกิจอเมริกัน, กฎหมายบริษัทอเมริกัน, กฎหมายสินบนอเมริกัน, กฎหมายหลักทรัพย์อเมริกา, ธุรกิจในประเทศไทย, พระราชบัญญัติการกระทำต่อการทุจริตต่างชาติ, สินบน
Posted in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), Thailand Business, US Business, US Citizenship, US Company Registration, US LLC, บริษัทอเมริกัน | No Comments »

It recently came to the administration’s attention that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States is reportedly investigating possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). To quote directly from a recent blog entry written by Ashby Jones on the Wall Street Journal‘s website wsj.com:

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether banks and private-equity firms violated bribery laws in their dealings with sovereign-wealth funds, according to people familiar with the matter. Click here for Dionne Searcey and Randall Smith’s article in today’s WSJ; click here for the NYT story; here for the Bloomberg story.

According to the WSJ, the SEC has sent letters of inquiry to banks such as Citigroup as well as private-equity firms including Blackstone Group, the people said. Though the letters didn’t contain specific allegations of bribery, they requested that firms retain documents and asked about the firms’ dealings with sovereign-wealth funds, the people said.

Those who are unfamiliar with the FCPA should note that the provisions of the law deal primarily with matters pertaining to bribery and corruption of foreign officials. Some Americans are under the mistaken impression that companies and individuals operating outside of the United States’ physical boundaries are entitled to engage in activity which amounts to bribery. In fact, this is simply not the case as the United States has a great deal of legislation in place as an attempt to discourage and punish such activity. When the legislation was passed it would appear that the intention was to criminalize activity by those physically abroad (or companies doing business abroad). However, the circumstances in the above cited matters would seem to suggest that those under investigation were operating (at least partially) within the geographical boundaries of the United States. To quote the aforementioned blog posting on wsj.com further:

The letters appear to be tied to a broad Foreign Corrupt Practices Act investigation of the banking industry, said attorneys who are familiar with past FCPA investigations of other industries. Foreign employees who work on sovereign-wealth funds would be considered government officials and covered by the FCPA, legal experts said.

As of yet, it would appear as though no one noted above has been formally charged in any matter pertaining to the FCPA. Furthermore, it should be noted that until such time as a party has made a pleading or been convicted of a violation of the FCPA they are, in the eyes of the law, innocent.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is an important piece of legislation for Americans and American companies. Pursuant to the provisions of the FCPA, American individuals and corporate entities are precluded from engaging in acts of bribery or, as the title of the act itself suggests, corrupt practices. That said, application of the FCPA must take into consideration the factual circumstances in a given case. Therefore, those conducting business abroad may find that the opinion of American legal experts experienced at handling legal and business matters in jurisdictions outside of the USA can be beneficial by providing unique insight and perspective into the customs and procedures of governmental organizations and officers abroad while maintaining an American attorney’s understanding of the FCPA.

For example, the Kingdom of Thailand has a very different legal system compared to that of the United States. Meanwhile, the business community in Thailand is also dissimilar from that of the USA. An upshot of these facts is that American Citizens and US Companies attempting to conduct business in Thailand may have little idea of how to effectively operate while still complying with laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.  The same can be said for many of the nations of Asia as the legal systems, cultural traditions, customs, and trade practices of some countries can prove bewildering to those who are accustomed to conducting business in a more “Western” context. The fact is: the FCPA is a serious piece of legislation with which American companies and individuals must maintain compliance. In some cases, retaining the services of legal counsel to assist in understanding the FCPA and methods of maintaining compliance can prove highly beneficial for both natural and corporate persons.

One can hope that the aforementioned inquiries prove fruitless due to the fact that no violations occurred. Bearing that in mind, if violations of the FCPA occurred, then it would seem highly likely that an organization such as the SEC would be able to uncover them.

For related information please see: Amity Treaty Company or American LLC.

Tags: American Business, American Business Asia, American Business Thailand, banking FCPA Compliance, Blackstone Group, Citigroup, FCPA, FCPA Compliance, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Compliance, Private Equity FCPA, Private Equity Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, SEC, Securities and Exchange Commission, Sovereign Wealth Funds, US Business, US Business Asia, US Business Thailand, US Company Thailand
Posted in Amity Treaty, Thailand Business, Thailand company, US Business, US Citizenship, US Company Registration, US LLC | No Comments »

American Citizens and United States Lawful Permanent Residents often travel outside of the USA. In situations where one is traveling abroad it may prove necessary to go to a US Embassy overseas in order to obtain services which can only be performed by a Consular Officer. In order to forestall unnecessary trips to American Posts abroad this blog routinely posts the holiday closing schedules of various US Missions in Asia. This blogger has personally experienced the frustration that can result from traveling to an American Embassy only to find it closed in observance of one of the more obscure American holidays or a holiday routinely observed by the host nation. Hopefully posting this information will keep others from making the same mistake. To quote directly from the official website of the United States Embassy in Beijing, China:

Embassy Holidays for 2011

**        January 3          Monday          New Year’s Day
*          January 17        Monday          Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Birthday
**        February 2-6     Wed-Sun        Chinese (Lunar) New Year
*          February 21       Monday          President’s Day
**        April 5                Tuesday          Tomb Sweeping Day
**        May 1-2             Sun-Mon        International Labor Day
*          May 30               Monday          Memorial Day
**        June 6                Monday          Dragon Boat Festival
*          July 4                 Monday          Independence Day
*          September 5      Monday          Labor Day
**        September 12    Monday          Mid-Autumn Festival
**        October 1-5       Sat-Wed         Chinese National Day
*          October 10        Monday          Columbus Day
*          November 11     Friday             Veteran’s Day
*          November 24     Thursday       Thanksgiving Day
*          December 26     Monday          Christmas Day

*          Americans Holidays
**        Chinese Holidays
***      Chinese and American Holidays

Those interested in services such as the issuance of new visa pages, Consular Reports of Birth Abroad, or US Passports are well advised to contact an American Citizen Services (ACS) Section of the nearest US Mission abroad. It may also prove wise to set an appointment with ACS online as doing so often facilitates smoother processing of requests made by those appearing at the Consulate.

For those seeking the homepage of the US Embassy in Beijing please click HERE.

American Citizens and/or Lawful Permanent Residents wishing to obtain family visa benefits for a Chinese loved one are likely to process their visa application through an Immigrant Visa Unit at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad. For purposes of visa processing, the K1 visa, although officially a non-immigrant US fiance visa, is treated in much the same way as immigrant visas such as the CR-1 visa and the IR-1 visa.

Those seeking Investment based visas such as the EB-5 visa or employment based visas such as the L-1 visa are usually required to have an immigration petition approved by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) before the visa application can be processed at a US Mission abroad.

Those seeking a non-immigrant B-2 visa (tourists), B-1 visa (short term business traveler), J-1 visa (exchange visitor), F-1 visa (student visa) are likely required to process their visa application through a Non-Immigrant Visa Unit of a US Mission abroad.

For related information please see: US Visa China.

Tags: American Visa China, American Visa PRC, K-1 Visa China, K1 Visa China, US Visa China, US Visa PRC
Posted in Thailand Business | No Comments »

It recently came to the attention of the administration of this blog that a new trade complex is to be erected in Bangkok for the purpose of facilitating the trade of Chinese goods in Thailand and Greater South East Asia. To quote directly from the Voice of America News website:

Chinese state media say work will begin this month on a massive trading complex in Bangkok where Chinese manufacturers will be able to re-export their goods.

The China Daily newspaper said Thursday that the China City Complex will cost $1.5 billion and sprawl over almost three-quarters of a square kilometer. Chinese manufacturers will be able to import goods to Thailand, taking advantage of a new free trade deal, and then ship to the United States and Europe under more advantageous quotas and tariffs.

It is interesting to note that China officially became the second largest economy in the world in 2010. This plan will likely result in an increasingly prosperous trade relationship between the Peoples’ Republic of China and the Kingdom of Thailand. The Voice of America News website went on:

China has been using trade and commercial projects to improve its diplomatic and strategic standing in Southeast Asia. Thailand’s deputy minister of commerce, Alongkorn Ponlaboot, is quoted by China Daily saying the China City Complex corroborates “a strategic business-partner relationship” between China and Thailand.

China’s free-trade agreement with the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations was concluded last year.

Putting aside diplomatic and strategic matters, the ambitious project could result in economic benefits for many ASEAN countries (Association of South East Asian Nations) especially Thailand. The creation of a new commercial project such as the one proposed will likely come with the added benefit of new jobs for Thais near Bangkok, new business opportunities for Thai entrepreneurs, new trade opportunities for Thai, Chinese, and other foreign investors; and an overall increase in the flow of goods, capital, labor, and resources to the Kingdom of Thailand and the Greater ASEAN region.

Each year, foreign companies and individuals opt to pursue business ventures in the Kingdom of Thailand. In some cases, entrepreneurs incorporate a Thai Company in order to maintain limited liability while conducting business. Sometimes individuals opt to do business under a Thai sole proprietorship. Partnerships often prefer the added layer of limited liability that can be conferred upon certain members of a Limited Liability Partnership in Thailand. Large ventures conducting business in Thailand occasionally opt to take their enterprise public through the registration of a Thai public company. In any case, those wishing to conduct trade or business in the Kingdom of Thailand are well advised to contact a Law Firm in Thailand as advice and counsel regarding the unique aspects of Thai law can be highly advantageous for businesses making their first appearance in the Thai market. Foreign nationals employed or working in Thailand should note that all foreigners working within the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Thailand are required to have a Thai work permit in order to lawfully take up virtually any type of employment.

Matters pertaining to the acquisition of Thai property or Thai Real Estate within the context of multi-jurisdictional business transactions can be complex and multifaceted. For this reason it is highly advisable that foreign nationals or foreign companies conducting business in the Kingdom of Thailand retain the services of a firm to assist with Thai property matters prior to making an irrevocable decisions regarding the acquisition of Thai real estate or property.

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

Tags: Asian Business, ASsociation of Southeast ASian Nations, Business in ASEAN, Chinese Business in Thailand, SouthEast Asia Business, Thai Business, Thai Property, Thai Real Estate, Thailand Business, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate
Posted in Ecommerce, News, Thailand Business, Thailand company, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate, Thailand Visa, Thailand Work Permit | No Comments »

2010 has been a watershed year in many respects, but the most remarkable thing about the year 2010, in this author’s opinion, was the global paradigm shift regarding Asia. Where once Asia might have been viewed by the North American and European press, business community, and public as a sort of afterthought, 2010 proved that one of, if not the, most important geographical regions in terms of economic growth and technological innovation is East Asia.

As always, Asia’s economic importance can be discerned by looking at currency imbalances, industry analysis, and economic growth figures. However, this blogger feels that one of the most significant indicators of Asia’s “coming of age” in the global arena is evidenced by the fact that many nations in Asia are flexing their muscles in terms of enforcing their will upon the internet. Where once Asian governments seemed to fall in line with Western attitudes toward the the regulation of cyberspace and all of the cultural changes that come with the spread of easy access to the World Wide Web, now it would appear as if governments, businesses, and organizations in North and Southeast Asia are coming up with their own strategies for regulating internet access, promoting ecommerce, and connecting people. Counter-intuitive as is may seem to those operating from a Western perspective, many of the strategies adopted by Asian governments are not designed to facilitate broader access to online technology.  In a recent article posted on the Telegraph’s official website www.telegraph.co.uk, it was noted that Chinese authorities are taking stringent measures against Skype, the online communications service. To quote directly from the Telegraph’s official website:

China on Thursday announced that it had made illegal the use of Skype, the popular internet telephony service, as the country continues to shut itself off from the rest of the world…

In the latest move dashing Western internet company hopes of breaking into China, it was announced that all internet phone calls were to be banned apart from those made over two state-owned networks, China Unicom and China Telecom.

“[This] is expected to make services like Skype unavailable in the country,” reported the People’s Daily, the official mouthpiece of the Communist party.

Skype is not the only web based company that has experienced its share of problems in the Chinese market. Increasingly, many companies seem to be finding themselves restricted from the internet in China as the Telegraph went on to note:    

Websites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are already blocked in China and Google closed down its Chinese servers last year after heavy government pressure.

It should be noted that Mainland China (also referred to as the Peoples’ Republic of China) boasts a population of approximately 1.3 billion people. For many firms, especially those with a significant online presence, China represents an emerging market with virtually limitless potential. However, China is not the only nation in Asia which seems poised for a more dynamic place in the international business arena. Countries such as the Kingdom of Thailand and the Republic of Indonesia have proven to be fertile ground for the same companies which China is attempting to block. According to Internetworldstats.com the Republic of Indonesia saw 27,338,560 Facebook users as of the end of August 2010.   In an interesting posting on www.nickburcher.com, a fascinating website dedicated to providing information and insight regarding the evolution of advertising and media, this blogger found the following graph noting the the increase in Facebook usage as of 2009:

The growth percentages noted above are truly astounding especially when one bears in mind that a country such as China boasts a larger population compared to that of those countries surveyed. Furthermore, the above quotation merely notes increased Facebook usage as of 2009. 2010 likely showed further growth. This could be one reason why many online businesses are attempting to find a compromise with China in an effort to enjoy access to such a lucrative market.

In 2010, Google had some problems with the Chinese government as an article on Sky News’s official website pointed out back in July of 2010. To quote directly from that article:

Beijing has renewed Google’s licence in a move that allows the web giant to continue operating in China, the company has said…

Google revealed the development on its blog and said: “We are very pleased that the government has renewed our ICP licence and we look forward to continuing to provide web search and local products to our users in China.”

China is the world’s biggest internet market and Google’s right to supply the country’s users was suspended after a row over censorship.

To get around the restrictions, Google began to redirect its Chinese users to a landing page in Hong Kong.

If the licence had been rejected outright, as some analysts wrongly predicted, it could have spelled future trouble for Google’s non-search businesses in China.

As noted above, termination of direct access to the Chinese market could have been particularly problematic even for a company as monolithic as Google since the sheer size of the Chinese market is enough to make the thought of being shut out unthinkable for virtually any company, especially companies whose profitability depends upon open access to their website. Enter Mark Zuckerberg, the “Young Turk” who took the online world by storm with the creation and subsequent expansion of Facebook.com, the online social networking website which is currently unavailable in the Peoples’ Republic of China. Recently, it was reported that Mr. Zuckerberg went to China on what seems to have been a sort of vacation/fact finding tour. To quote directly from a recent article on iol.co.za:

In China Mark Zuckerberg is almost unknown. Now, after pictures of him visiting Beijing’s biggest internet company have appeared online, feverish speculation has erupted over whether he could be set to change that by taking his social networking site, Facebook, into the one country that has resisted its charms.

That Mr Zuckerberg is in Beijing this week might alone be enough to trigger rumours as to his intentions – even if it is nominally for a holiday with his girlfriend Priscilla Chan and no other entourage.

But when he was spotted yesterday at the headquarters of Baidu, the giant Chinese search engine company, with its chief executive, Robin Li, the reaction reached a pitch of excitement far beyond what is good for most people’s health.

Any alliance was denied by Baidu’s spokesman. But there is little doubt that the Chinese market remains a tempting prize for the 26-year-old Mr Zuckerberg. Facebook has been blocked by the Chinese government, denying him access to the country’s 300 million regular internet users.

The most striking piece of information to be gleaned from the above quotation, in this blogger’s opinion, is the fact that the article points out that China boasts regular internet usage by approximately 300 million people. That is almost the ENTIRE population of the United States of America. As can be quickly inferred, such large numbers of potential users make China a very critical market for firms, in virtually any industry, with a major online presence.

On a related note, Mr. Zuckerberg’s Asian journey did not end in China. To quote directly from a recent article on the Daily Mail’s official website dailymail.co.uk:

Tags: Asian Business, business in China, Business in Thailand, Ecommerce, Ecommerce in Asia, Ecommerce in China, Ecommerce in Thailand, Facebook, Google, Information Technology, Information Technology in Asia, Information Technology in China, Information Technology in Thailand, IT, IT in China, IT in Thailand, Mark Zuckerberg, Skype, Skype China, Skype illegal in China, Twitter, Youtube, Zuckerberg in China, Zuckerberg in Thailand
Posted in Ecommerce, News, Opinion, Thailand Business, US Business | No Comments »

Those who read this blog may likely have noticed that the issue of Thai immigration is a frequent topic of discussion. Recently, this author came upon an interesting announcement regarding the issuance of Thai reentry permits at the Suvarnabhumi International Airport in Bangkok, Thailand. The following is quoted directly from the official website of Suvarnabhumi International Airport:

In a previous posting on this blog, the administration pondered the prospect of Thai reentry permits and whether they would ever again be available at the airport as opposed to the Royal Thai Immigration Headquarters at Chaeng Wattana. It would appear that from this point onwards, Thai reentry permits will be available to departing foreign nationals at the airport.

For those who are unfamiliar with the protocols and rules associated with Thai immigration, anyone present in the Kingdom of Thailand on a Thai visa must obtain a reentry permit prior to leaving the Kingdom of Thailand. Those who fail to obtain a Thai reentry permit prior to departing Thailand may lose their Thai visa status upon departure. For this reason, reentry permits should be obtained by anyone in Thai visa status who wishes to return to Thailand. A frequently asked question in this vein is: do I need a reentry permit if I am present in the Kingdom on a visa exemption? The short answer: no. Those who enter the country on a Thailand visa exemption cannot obtain a reentry permit as they are not technically in possession of a valid Thai visa. Those present in the Kingdom of Thailand on a Thai visa extension are required to obtain a Thai reentry permit prior to departure lest the foreign national fall out of status entirely upon departing Thailand. The same can be said for those who are present in Thailand with lawful permanent residence. A Permanent Resident in Thailand must receive authorization to leave the country whilst simultaneously maintaining lawful status in the Kingdom or else face the prospect of falling entirely out of status upon departure.

Those who are present in the Kingdom of Thailand on a multiple entry one year Thai visa should not need to obtain a Thai reentry permit when departing the Kingdom, but those with a multiple entry visa are generally required to depart the Kingdom at least every 90 days in order to maintain lawful status.

Fore related information please see: Thailand business visa or Thai Work Permit.

Tags: Multiple Entry Thai Visa, Multiple Entry Thailand Visa, One Year Thai Visa, One Year Thailand Visa, Reentry Permit, Suvarnabhumi, Suvarnabhumi International Airport, Thai B Visa, Thai Business Visa, Thai Immigration, Thai O Visa, Thai permanent residence, Thai Reentry Permit, Thai Retirement Visa, Thai Visa, Thai Visa Extension, Thai Visas, Thai Work Permit, Thailand B Visa, Thailand Business Visa, Thailand ED Visa, Thailand Education Visa, Thailand Immigration, Thailand o visa, Thailand Permanent Residence, Thailand Reentry Permit, Thailand Retirement Visa, Thailand Visa, Thailand visa extension, Thailand Visas
Posted in News, Thailand Business, Thailand Visa, Thailand Work Permit | No Comments »

ผู้ที่ติดตามบล็อกนี้อาจจะสังเกตเห็นว่า กิจกรรมทางการเมืองที่เพิ่มมากขึ้นนั้นทำให้บรรยากาศทางการเมืองและเศรษฐกิจของประเทศไทยเกิดความวุ่นวาย มีผู้คนจำนวนมากรู้สึกว่า ความยุ่งเหยิงที่เกิดขึ้นนี้เป็นเพียงเรื่องที่เกิดขึ้นเพียงชั่วคราวและไม่ได้หมายความว่า จะทส่งผลเสียในระยะยาว ในช่วงระยะเวลาเพียง 9-12 เดือนที่ผ่านมานี้ ทั้งผู้คนและธุรกิจในประเทศต่างมีความเสี่ยงใหม่ๆเกิดขึ้น อ้างอิงจากเว็บไซต์ Westlawbusiness.com

เมื่อไม่นานมานี้ หลายๆบริษัทเปิดเผยถึงความเสี่ยงที่เกิดจากความวุ่นวายทางการเมืองในประเทศไทย ตัวอย่างเช่น Priceline.com ซึ่งเป็นผู้ขายทอดตลาดโรงแรมออนไลน์เปิดเผยว่า เหตุการณ์ความไม่สงบที่เกิดขึ้นในประเทศไทยนั้นเป็นกุญแจสำคัญ…..และธุรกิจ Booking.com ในเอเชีย ผลที่ตามมาคือ ยอดการจองในตลาดลดลงเมื่อเปรียบเทียบช่วงเวลาเดียวกันของปีที่ผ่านมา ประเทศไทยเผชิญกับความวุ่นวายในบ้านเมืองตั้งแต่ปีที่ผ่านมาและยังคงดำเนินต่อเนื่องไปอาจจะกระทบกับการดำเนินธุรกิจต่างๆในประเทศไทย

ผู้ผลิตเคเบิ้ลเพื่อการสื่อสาร General Cable รายงานว่า ความเสี่ยงของธุรกิจนี้ขึ้นอยู่กัความวุ่นวายที่เกิดขึ้นในประเทศไทย ผู้จัดหาทองแดง อลูมินั่ม สายไฟเบอร์ออฟติค และผลิตภัณฑ์เคเบิลอื่นเปิดเผยว่า ธุรกิจนี้ขึ้นอยู่กับความเสี่ยงทางเศรษฐกิจ การเมืองเละความเสี่ยงอื่นๆในการบำรุงรักษาและการจัดจำหน่ายผลิตภัณฑ์ในต่างประเทศ…เมื่อไม่นานมานี้ ประเทศไทยเผชิญกับเหตุการณ์ความไม่สงบทางการเมืองและการทหารที่สำคัญในหลายๆจังหวัด รัฐบาลที่ได้รับการเลือกตั้งนั้นถูกปฏิวัติเมื่อเดือนพฤศจิกายน 2549ซึ่งรัฐบาลที่ได้รับการเลือกตั้งใหม่กำลังเร่งฟื้นฟูประเทศ

เหตุการณ์ความวุ่นวายทางการเมืองนั้นก่อให้เกิดผลลัพธ์ที่ไม่สามารถคาดการณ์ได้อย่างมากมายกับธุรกิจบางส่วนและธุรกิจทั่วเอเชีย นี่เป็นข้อดีของการที่จะบรรษัทข้ามชาติจะมีที่ปรึกษาทางกฎหมายที่มีความเชี่ยวชาญด้านธรรมเนียมการปฏิบัติของธุรกิจท้องถิ่นซึ่งจะช่วยแนะนำลูกความในประเด็นทางกฎหมายที่ไม่สามารถคาดการณ์ได้และในบางกรณีที่อาจจะเกิดความเสี่ยงได้

คนหลายๆคน รวมทั้งผู้เขียนด้วยต่างรู้สึกว่าความวุ่นวายทางการเมืองที่เกิดขึ้นอยู่นี้เป็นเพียงแค่การชนกันบนถนนที่จะนำไปสู่ความสงบและความมั่งคั่งทางเศรษฐกิจของประเทศไทยและภูมิภาคเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้ สิ่งที่พึงระลึกถึงคือ ทุกฝ่ายต่างต้องการก่อตั้งธุรกิจหรือบริษัทในประเทศไทยเช่นเดียวกับการค้นคว้าและสอบทานธุรกิจก่อที่จะมีการตัดสินใจทางธุรกิจในกรุงเทพฯ หรือในตลาดอื่นๆเช่น กัมพูชา ลาว พม่า มาเลเซีย เวียดนามซึ่งเต็มไปด้วยประเด็นทางกฎหมายที่คาดไม่ถึงและประเด็นทางธุรกิจอื่นๆซึงอาจจะเก ดขึ้นในเขตอำนาจของสหรัฐอเมริกา สหภาพยุโรป ออสเตรเลีย หรือแคนาดา

ผู้ที่ปรารถนาจะดำเนินธุรกิจในประเทศไทยนั้นเลือกที่จะอยู่ภายใต้บริษัทจำกัดไทยในฐานะที่เป็นนิติบุคคลจำกัดความรับผิด การจำกัดคว่ามรับผิดนั้นเป็นหนึ่งในวิธีการแรกสำหรับผู้ที่ปรารถนาจะหลีกเลี่ยงความเสี่ยงทางธุรกิจที่คาดไม่ถึง ธุรกิจอเมริกันนั้นสามารถได้รับสิทธิประโยชน์ตามสนธิสัญญาพันธไมตรีไทย-สหรัฐอเมริกา ไม่ว่าโครงสร้างของบริษัทจะเป็นอย่างไร ชาวต่างชาติที่ปรารถนาจะทำงานในเมืองไทยนั้นต้องได้รับใบอนุญาตการทำงานตามการจ้างงานในกฎหมายแรงงาน

To see this post in English please see: Thai Limited Company

Tags: ก่อตั้งธุรกิจในไทย, จัดตั้งบริษัทในประเทศไทย, จัดตั้งบริษัทไทย, ดำเนินธุรกิจในไทย, ธุรกิจในประเทศไทย, บริษัทกฎหมายในประเทศไทย, บริษัทในประเทศไทย, บริษัทไทย
Posted in Thailand Business, ธูรกิจในประเทศไทย | No Comments »