Thailand’s Ongoing Battle with Intellectual Property Violations Amid USTR Watch List Status

Thailand remains on the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Watch List for intellectual property (IP) rights protection in the 2025 Special 301 Report, despite recent strides in strengthening enforcement and legislative reforms. The annual report, released on May 2, 2025, underscores persistent challenges in curbing counterfeit and pirated goods, particularly in online markets, while acknowledging the Thai government’s efforts to address systemic issues. As trade negotiations with the U.S. continue to hinge on IP protection, Thailand’s status raises questions about its economic partnerships and global standing.

Progress and Persistent Challenges

The 2025 USTR Special 301 Report highlights Thailand’s ongoing struggle with IP violations, placing the country alongside 17 others on the Watch List. This designation, while less severe than the Priority Watch List, indicates that significant concerns remain regarding the adequacy and enforcement of IP rights. Thailand has been on the Watch List since 2017, following a decade on the more critical Priority Watch List from 2007 to 2016. The report notes improvements, including draft amendments to the Patent Act released in December 2024, aimed at streamlining patent registration, reducing backlogs, and aligning with international standards such as the Hague Agreement on industrial design registration.

Despite these advancements, the USTR points to enforcement as a key area of concern. While Thai authorities have intensified efforts targeting warehouses and distribution centers, counterfeit and pirated goods remain widely available, especially through online platforms. Rights holders have criticized law enforcement for focusing on small-scale sellers rather than larger manufacturers and distributors, who are often the source of widespread IP violations. This gap in enforcement continues to undermine Thailand’s progress, leaving it vulnerable to criticism from trading partners like the United States.

Government Commitment to Reform

Earlier this year, Deputy Commerce Minister Naphinthorn Srisanpang emphasized the Thai government’s determination to remove the country from the Watch List by 2025. In a statement made in February, the minister outlined renewed efforts to crack down on IP violations, signaling a proactive approach to addressing U.S. concerns. “We are committed to protecting intellectual property and ensuring a fair market for creators and businesses” said Naphinthorn, highlighting the economic stakes involved.

Thailand’s push for reform is not merely a response to external pressure but also a recognition of the broader economic implications. Strong IP protection is increasingly seen as a cornerstone of innovation and foreign investment, both of which are critical to Thailand’s aspirations as a regional economic hub. The government’s efforts to amend legislation and enhance enforcement mechanisms reflect a broader strategy to align with global trade standards, particularly as the U.S. remains a key export market for Thai goods, ranging from electronics to agricultural products.

Broader Implications for U.S.-Thailand Trade Relations

The Special 301 Report carries significant weight in shaping U.S. trade policy, often serving as a benchmark for negotiations with trading partners. U.S. officials have long emphasized the importance of IP protection as a non-tariff barrier that impacts American businesses and innovators. Jamieson Greer, a U.S. Trade Representative, underscored this point in a recent statement: “Americans take great pride in being the world’s leading creators and innovators. Our trading partners must address the concerns outlined in the Special 301 Report and stop those who steal the intellectual property of hardworking businesses and individuals.”

For Thailand, remaining on the Watch List could complicate bilateral trade discussions, especially as the U.S. continues to prioritize fair trade practices under the current administration. Former President Donald Trump, often cited in the report’s context, had repeatedly criticized trading partners for exploiting U.S. markets through inadequate IP protections. While Thailand has avoided the more severe Priority Watch List designation—unlike Mexico, which was downgraded in 2025 citing unresolved concerns under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)—its status still signals a need for sustained reform to secure favorable trade terms.

Regional and Global Context

Thailand’s challenges with IP enforcement are not unique in the Southeast Asian region, where online marketplaces and porous borders often facilitate the trade of counterfeit goods. The 2025 report also lists other regional players, such as Indonesia, on the Priority Watch List, reflecting broader systemic issues in IP protection across developing economies. For Thailand, however, the stakes are particularly high given its role as a manufacturing and export-driven economy, with sectors like technology and fashion heavily reliant on IP integrity.

Globally, the USTR report serves as a reminder of the interconnected nature of trade and innovation. Countries like China, India, and Russia, also on the Priority Watch List, face similar scrutiny, with the U.S. pushing for stricter enforcement as a precondition for trade agreements. Thailand’s position, while less critical, still places it under a microscope, with potential ramifications for foreign direct investment and access to U.S. markets. If unaddressed, these concerns could deter American companies from partnering with Thai firms, impacting sectors that depend on licensing and brand protection.

Economic Costs of IP Violations

The economic toll of IP violations in Thailand is difficult to quantify precisely, but estimates suggest significant losses for both local and international businesses. Counterfeit goods, ranging from luxury items to pharmaceuticals, not only undermine legitimate markets but also pose risks to consumer safety. Online platforms, often hosted outside Thailand’s jurisdiction, exacerbate the problem by providing a low-risk avenue for illicit trade. The Thai government’s focus on warehouses and physical distribution centers, while necessary, has yet to fully address the digital dimension of IP theft, a growing concern highlighted in the USTR report.

Moreover, the cost of enforcement itself is substantial. Raids, legal proceedings, and public awareness campaigns require significant resources, often straining budgets already stretched thin by other national priorities. For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which form the backbone of Thailand’s economy, the lack of robust IP protection can be particularly devastating, as they often lack the means to pursue legal action against infringers. Addressing these challenges requires not only legislative reform but also investment in technology and international cooperation to tackle cross-border violations.

Public and Industry Reactions

Reactions within Thailand to the USTR report have been mixed. Industry groups, particularly those representing technology and creative sectors, have welcomed the government’s legislative efforts but remain frustrated by the slow pace of enforcement. Many argue that without a comprehensive strategy targeting online marketplaces and major distributors, progress will remain superficial. Meanwhile, small-scale vendors, often the focus of enforcement actions, express concern over livelihoods, claiming they are unfairly targeted while larger players evade scrutiny.

On the international stage, U.S.-based rights holders continue to press for stronger action, viewing Thailand’s Watch List status as a signal of unresolved risks. Some have called for capacity-building initiatives, such as training for Thai law enforcement and judiciary on IP issues, as a way to bridge enforcement gaps. Others advocate for stricter penalties and faster legal processes to deter violations, though such measures must balance economic realities with the need for reform.

Looking Ahead: A Path to Delisting?

As Thailand navigates its IP challenges, the road to removal from the USTR Watch List remains uncertain. The government’s commitment, as articulated by Deputy Commerce Minister Naphinthorn Srisanpang, is clear, but translating policy into measurable outcomes will require sustained effort across multiple fronts. Strengthening digital enforcement, engaging with online platforms, and targeting large-scale distributors could yield significant progress, though these measures must be accompanied by public education on the importance of IP rights.

For now, Thailand’s status in the 2025 Special 301 Report serves as both a critique and an opportunity. With global trade dynamics increasingly tied to IP protection, the country’s ability to address USTR concerns could shape its economic trajectory for years to come. As reforms unfold, stakeholders in Bangkok and beyond will be watching closely, hopeful that Thailand can turn the page on its long-standing Watch List designation.