Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing the Amity Treaty. For those who are unaware, the United States and Thailand have a bilateral Treaty that goes back some nearly 200 years that allows those Americans who are doing business here in Thailand - either through a corporation or individually, or through a corporation in Thailand by way of being a shareholder I should say - to avail themselves of protections and benefits under the US-Thai Treaty of Amity. Meaning, once certified, such a company can be 100% American owned. So, the thing to take away from that video that's a big one is that. If you have never been aware of that as somebody looking to do business in Thailand, yes Americans can own their companies outright here notwithstanding restrictions under the Foreign Business Act that may apply to other nationalities; it's just sort of the nature of the beast out here. 

Meanwhile, there has been some news regarding “beneficial ownership” scrutiny by the US Treasury Department and I wanted to make a video to kind of get into some of the ins and outs of how this could pertain to the Amity Treaty. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from Reuters, that's reuters.com, the article is titled: US Treasury Department says it will not enforce anti-money laundering law. Quoting directly: "The US Treasury Department said on Sunday it would not enforce an anti-money laundering law that obliges millions of business entities to disclose the identities of their real beneficial owners." So what we are talking about here is in other jurisdictions, nominees are legal. Here in Thailand, nominees are explicitly illegal as I've discussed in other videos. That doesn't necessarily pertain to The Amity Treaty per se. It could pertain to people here in Thailand, especially Americans, who are set up in a 49/51 sort of set up here in Thailand in order to be in compliance with the Foreign Business Act. As we discussed in other videos, under this so-called Biden-era Corporate Transparency Act as we'll get to in a moment, in the past or under prior analysis, it appeared that man that was going to be a real sticky wicket with regard to expats, especially expat Americans, with business entities here in Thailand. That's why generally speaking, I always advise Americans to be Amity certified. That being said, certain things may or may not be able to fall under the Amity Treaty and again different circumstances are going to drive different outcomes and conclusions. 

That being said, the point I'm trying to make here is this could have been a real problem, and I think the Administration sees that and they are saying, 'hey we're not going to deal with that.' So quoting further: "The Trump Administration has opposed the Biden-era Corporate Transparency Act on the grounds that it is a burden on low-risk entities. The Act has faced repeated legal challenges. In a statement, the Treasury Department said it would not enforce any penalties under the Act against US citizens," - that's noteworthy - "or domestic reporting companies." As we have discussed in other videos, the unique nature of the Amity Treaty and how it interacts with the domestic laws of both the United States and Thailand creates this unique situation wherein such corporations are considered domestic non-resident entities of the United States. Which brings up how does this interact with that? Remains to be seen. It's going to be interesting, but I think overall it's all good news because this Administration has made clear they are not interested in sitting around and nitpicking people and scrutinizing every little aspect of their business enterprise for some sort of undisclosed beneficial owner or something of this nature. 

Long story short, it's pretty good news. Exactly the ramifications with regard to this and the US-Thai Treaty of Amity remains to be seen but we will certainly be keeping you updated on this channel as the situation evolves.