Trade in Thailand

COUNTRY

Mosjeed of Thailand

 

Formal Name: Kingdom of Thailand.
Short Form: Thailand (formerly Siam).
Term for Citizens: Thai.
Capital: Bangkok.
 

GEOGRAPHY

Thailand in map

 

Size: Approximately 514,000 square kilometers.
Topography: Chief topographic features include central plain dominated by Mae Nam (river) Chao Phraya and its tributaries. To northeast rises dry, undulating Khorat Plateau bordered on east by Mekong River. Mountains along northern and western borders with Burma extend south into narrow, largely rain-forested Malay Peninsula. Network of rivers and canals associated with northern mountains and central plain drain, via Chao Phraya, into Gulf of Thailand. Mae Nam Mun and other northeastern streams drain via Mekong into South China Sea. Soils vary. Topography and drainage define four regions: North, Northeast, Center, and South.
Climate: Tropical monsoon climate. Southwest monsoons arriving between May and July signal start of rainy season lasting until October. Cycle reverses with northeast monsoon in November and December, ushering in dry season. Cooler temperatures give way to extremely hot, dry weather March through May. In general, rainfall heaviest in South, lightest in Northeast.

ECONOMY

Salient Features: Mixed economy includes both strong private sector and state enterprises; government assumes responsibility for general infrastructure development. Basically capitalist, committed to free trade. Rapid economic development of 1960s and 1970s slowed by worldwide recession of early 1980s. Strong recovery by 1987. Bangkok metropolitan area faced problems of rapid modernization, including housing shortages and pressure on such basic services as water, sewage, and health care.

Statistic of Thai business

Agriculture:Food surpluses produced by dominant agricultural sector of enterprising, independent smallholders. About 69 percent of labor force engaged in sector, and nearly 80 percent of population dependent on it for livelihood in the mid1980s . Agricultural commodities accounted for some 60 percent of export values in late 1980s. Major crops included rice, maize, cassava, rubber sugarcane, coconuts, cotton, kenaf, and tobacco. Forest cover decreased from more than 50 percent in 1961 to less than 30 percent in 1987. Fisheries important for food supply and foreign exchange earnings.
Industry: Modern enterprises mainly concentrated in Bangkok and surrounding provinces. Majority Thai owned, but joint foreign ventures numerous; state enterprises form important segment. In late 1980s, sector accounted for roughly 20 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and 30 percent of total exports. Main categories of manufacturing included food and beverages, textiles and apparel, and wood and mineral products. Mineral resources contributed about 2 percent to gross national product (GNP) and included tin, tungsten, fluorite, antimony, and precious stones, all significant foreign exchange earners.

Energy Sources: Exploited domestic resources include small oil fields, large lignite deposits, natural gas in Gulf of Thailand, and hydroelectric power. Extensive, largely unevaluated oil shale deposits also identified, but exploitation economically infeasible in 1980s. Thermal (oil, natural gas, and lignite) power generation accounted for about 70 percent of total 7,570 megawatt installed generating capacity in 1986; hydropower, which remained largely unexploited, supplied about 30 percent. Electricity generally available in Bangkok metropolitan area and in about 43,000 of nation's some 48,000 villages (mostly near Bangkok). Rural program under way for electrification of remaining villages by late 1990s.
Foreign Trade: Major exports primary and processed agricultural products, tin, clothing, and other manufactured consumer goods. Major imports capital goods, intermediate products, and raw materials; petroleum products largest single import by monetary value since mid-1970s. Largest trading partners Japan and United States; trade with Japan characterized by large deficit.

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT

In the 1960s and 1970s, the country's abundant natural resources, an enterprising and competitive private sector, and cautious and pragmatic economic management resulted in the emergence of one of the fastest growing and most successful economies among the developing countries. Between 1960 and 1970, the country's average annual growth rate of gross domestic product was 8.4 percent, compared with 5.8 percent for all middle-income, oil-importing countries. Between 1970 and 1980, the GDP rate of growth was 7.2 percent, compared with 5.6 percent for the middle-income oil-importing countries.

Bridge of business

The world slowdown by the late 1970s was mainly caused by the rise in oil prices. The Thai GDP in 1982 was US$36.7 billion. It rose to US$42 billion in 1985. The projected rate of growth for GDP during the early 1980s was around 4.3 percent as a result of falling demand and prices for Thai exports despite a drop in oil price. It was apparent that in the 1980s Thailand had lost its momentum; its Fifth Economic Development Plan targets had not been met because of serious macroeconomic imbalances, such as decreasing savings and investment rates, increasing budget deficits, and increasing debt and debt- servicing obligations. Whether Thailand could regain its former momentum depended on the success of its Sixth Economic Development Plan (1987-91).
Between 1970 and 1980, investment represented on the average 25.2 percent of GDP, compared with 24.7 percent by the mid-1980s. This proportion was one of the lowest investment rates in Southeast Asia. The national savings rate had fallen even more, from an average of 22 percent during the 1970s to around 17.8 percent by the mid-1980s. Hence, the average current-account deficit of 7 percent of GDP during the early 1980s had been caused by a declining savings rate rather than by an increase in investment rate. This imbalance was more serious than one caused by rising investment because rising investment could pay for itself with increased output and, possibly, increased savings so that debt could be repaid. With falling savings, foreign borrowing was used not to raise investment but merely to fill the investment-savings gap, which was mirrored in the external debt ratio of 39 percent of GDP and 146 percent of exports by the mid1980s . The total debt service ratio went up from 17.3 percent in 1980 to more than 25 percent by the mid-1980s. The increase was an important factor in the decision of the government to sharply reduce authorization for new commitments of public debt.

Financial Institutions

Thailand had many types of financial institutions, subject to different laws and regulated by different agencies. Most of them were privately owned, but some were state owned. The primary state-owned facility was the Bank of Thailand, which had responsibility and authority for monetary control in its role as the central bank. It served as the fiscal agent and the financier of the government; regulated the money supply, foreign exchange, and the banking system; and also served as the lender of last resort to the banks. Other state-owned facilities included the Government Savings Bank, the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, the Industrial Finance Corporation of Thailand, the Government Housing Bank, and the Small Industry Finance Corporation of Thailand.

By the mid-1980s, the 30 commercial banks had 1,526 branches handling the majority of all financial transactions in Thailand. The 16 largest banks accounted for over 90 percent of assets, deposits, and loans of the commercial banks, indicating a high concentration and little competition in the banking industry. Moreover, despite the impressive growth of banks, entrance by new banks was limited.
Finance and security companies comprised the second largest group of financial institutions with assets equaling nearly 22 percent of those of commercial banks. Concentration also existed in the securities industry, the 5 largest companies (out of 112) holding 19 percent of all finance and security assets. The finance companies were created by many domestic and foreign banks to overcome banking restrictions. Although they were intended to increase competition with commercial banks, the objective was not met because many banks used the companies as an extension of their own activities.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND FINANCE

International Trade

Thailand sustained a trade balance deficit from the early 1970s to the mid-1980s. Although the trade balance had improved during the first part of the 1970s, it worsened after the oil shocks of 1973 and 1979. In fact the net value of oil imports went from US$52.5 million in 1970 to US$684.7 million in 1982, with dependence on foreign oil reaching 75 percent in 1980 and declining to 50 percent by 1985. Although there was a general decline in the export performance of developing countries in the early 1980s, Thailand's recovery from the oil shock was further delayed by a loss in export competitiveness, a slowdown in the economies of major trading partners, and a growing debt service obligation resulting in part from rising interest rates. The current account balance deficits were not as severe as the trade deficits as a result of improving service balances. By 1986 the balance of payments had moved into surplus on current account. The major contribution to the service balance surplus was tourism, which increased from 630,000 tourists in 1970 to 2.6 million in 1986. Tourism was the top foreign exchange earner from 1981 to 1986. The trade deficit was caused in part by a decreasing growth rate of exports between 1980 and 1983, which improved slightly by 1985. The growth rate of imports also declined, but at a slower rate. Despite an increase in tourism, the trade deficit reached a peak in 1983 of US$3.9 billion. In 1985 exports totaled US$7.1 billion and imports US$9.2 billion, leaving an unfavorable trade balance of US$2.1 billion. By 1986 the deficit had decreased even further, with some of the reduction a result of the lower cost of imported oil.

The composition or structure of merchandise exports changed substantially between 1965 and 1985. Primary commodities accounted for 95 percent of Thailand's exports in 1965, and manufactured exports accounted for only 4 percent. By 1986 manufactured products comprised 55 percent of total exports, with textile products increasing from less than 1 percent in 1965 to 13 percent by 1986. Other major manufacturing exports in the mid-1980s included rubber products, processed foods, integrated circuits, metal products, jewelry, footwear, and furniture. Although agricultural exports as a percentage of total exports declined during this period, rice and other agricultural exports remained important for the Thai economy. By the mid-1980s, rice took the highest share of total agricultural exports. Cassava products, maize, sugar, rubber, fruit, and marine products were the other main exports in this category.
Between 1965 and 1985, the destinations of merchandise exports shifted from 54 percent of 1965 exports destined for developing countries to 56 percent of 1985 exports going to industrialized countries. This increase in the percentage of exports to industrialized countries, in combination with the changing structure of merchandise exports from predominantly agricultural to manufactured products, has fueled Thailand's economic growth. Thailand's major industrialized trading partners included the EEC, the United States, Japan, and the Netherlands. Furthermore, Thailand has developed significant trade relations with the newly industrializing countries (NICs) of Singapore, Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea (South Korea), and Taiwan. Additionally, Thailand has developed trade relations with Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and China.
Tariff barriers on imports from the developing countries had dropped with the implementation of the Tokyo Round (1973-79) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Rising nontariff barriers, resulting from domestic and international economic conditions in industrial countries, had more than offset the tariff reductions. In the United States the proportion of imports subject to such barriers more than doubled, and in the other industrial countries it rose by as much as 40 percent. Examples of nontariff barriers were quotas, voluntary exports restraints, the Multifiber Arrangements, sanitation rules, and subsidies.
Thai rice exports encountered the stiffest barriers in Japan, where the tariff rate was 15 percent and a global quota was in force. In the United States, tariff on rice was only 2.6 percent, and no explicit nontariff barriers existed except for stringent controls by the United States Food and Drug Administration. In the other industrialized countries, Thai rice exports faced varying levies. Thai agricultural exports to the developing countries met with stiff competition from subsidized United States cereal exports. Thailand entered into a voluntary export restraint with France for its cassava exports because of strong resistance to imports from the French producers of cereal-based animal feed. Rubber did not face major barriers except for quotas imposed by Japan. Maize exports did relatively poorly because of subsidized production and high tariffs in the industrialized countries. Sugar exports also faced subsidy problems in Western Europe and a 50 percent quota reduction by the United States. Despite nontariff barriers, Thai agricultural and manufactured exports faced less protectionism than the NICs in the early 1980s.

Of Thailand's manufactured exports, textiles were most affected by barriers because Thailand had to enter into bilateral agreements with industrial countries, which were similar to the voluntary export restraints under the Multifiber Arrangements. In addition, tariffs escalated with the degree of processing. For example, in the United States the average tariff for cotton fabrics was 9.6 percent, whereas it was 18 percent for garments. The United States imposed countervailing duties on Thai textile exports in protest against Thai government subsidies to textile exporters in the form of export packing credits, rediscount facilities for industrial bills, electricity discounts, and tax certificates.
Tariffs in Thailand before the 1970s were primarily used to generate revenues rather than to influence domestic production. The rates ranged from 15 to 30 percent, with higher rates applied to finished consumer goods imports. In the 1970s, however, tariff rates on finished consumer goods imports increased 30 to 50 percent. Rising protectionism continued in the late 1970s and early 1980s, with high tariff rates and the application of surcharges, quantitative restrictions, price controls, and domestic contents requirements.

External Debt

The Thai total long-term public and private debt grew from US$728 million in 1970 to US$13.3 billion in 1985. The external debt was increasing at a faster rate during this period than the growing gross national product. In 1970 the external debt was 11.1 percent of GNP, increasing to 36 percent of GNP by 1985. The ratio of debt payments or debt service to the total export of goods and services, one indicator of Thailand's ability to meet debt payments, increased from 14 percent in 1970 to 25.4 percent in 1985. The growth of external indebtedness averaged 25.2 percent between 1970 and 1980, compared with an average of 21 percent for Southeast and East Asian middle-income oil-importer countries. Public debt as a percentage of exports went from 47.9 percent to 75.9 percent between 1980 and 1983, but the proportion of public borrowing from foreign sources dropped from 52 percent to 42 percent during the same period. This was indicative of the growing concern of the public sector with the enlarged foreign debt and hence a higher reliance on domestic borrowing, which went from 48 percent to 55 percent during the same period. In the early 1980s, Thailand was characterized by high competition between the government and the private sector for scarce domestic savings, which forced private firms to rely more on external borrowing.

The composition of Thai indebtedness in terms of interest rates, maturity, and currency structure appeared to be better than that in most other developing countries. Because of its high credit rating, Thailand could borrow at about 8.4 percent in late 1983, compared with an average rate of 10.1 percent for other middle-income oil-importer countries. It had also the longest loan average maturity, 17.2 years compared with 12.2 years.
In terms of currency denomination, the Thai external debt consisted mostly of two currencies: the United States dollar and the Japanese yen, with increasing reliance on the yen because of the willingness of Japanese banks to lend at a lower spread than the other banks. Thailand was exposed to the risk of yen appreciation in the early 1980s because Japan received only 14 percent of Thai exports while accounting for 26 percent of imports. Meanwhile, the value of the yen had appreciated substantially relative to the baht. The baht was pegged to the United States dollar until 1984 when it had a fixed exchange rate of B23 per US$1. Thereafter, the baht was pegged to a basket of currencies and devalued by 14.8 percent against the dollar. According to some observers, Thailand needed to revise its external debt portfolio as well as limit its reliance on external debt.