What I am covering today is a sensitive issue that all economic research houses, both government and private, avoid talking about. That is the economic impact of the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia.
These research houses widely analysed the impact of Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs on Thai exports and GDP, but chose to be mute on the Thai-Cambodia trade impact.
Surely, readers understand why the issue is sensitive. Because it involves national sovereignty and pride. Whoever dares criticise the issue would immediately be accused of treachery. Therefore, no Thai economists will mention that the trade surplus with Cambodia is about 1.5% of GDP or about 280 billion baht. Loosing such a surplus, Thai GDP growth could be 1.5% lower.
The closure of the border has already taken its toll. Thai exports to Cambodia (in value) dropped 26.6% in July and 28.5% in August, while imports from Cambodia were more than 50% lower.
Those who argue that only big businesses are suffering from the trade loss forget the fact that big businesses employ workers to produce products and source supplies and services from SMEs. No one can escape the economic impact.
The less than 30% drop in export volume, despite the closure of borders starting at the end of June, clearly indicates that the closure order is only partially effective in stopping trade flow. This raises the question as to whether there is a more effective means.
Readers might think that I must suggest reopening the borders to allow the free flow of goods as economic well-being is more important than sovereignty. Wrong. If Thailand has to lose 1.5% of GDP, so be it. I’m as patriotic as the next Thai, but I want a more effective means to retaliate against Cambodian aggression.
May I suggest an option to keep our trade surplus and have Cambodians learn expensive lessons for meddling with Thai sovereignty? This option is to tax both the import of goods from Cambodia and exports to Cambodia.
A 19% tariff should be imposed on imports from Cambodia and a 5% tariff should be imposed for exports. I will use the 2024 figures as the basis for an explanation. Please do not be quick to think that imposing import and export taxes is not possible under the Asean Free Trade Agreement. Remember, if there is a will, there is a way.
The loophole is that these 19% and 5% charges are not import and export taxes. Instead, they are fees for import/export permits. Those who want to import from and export to Cambodia must obtain special permits. The fee for the permit would be 19% of import value and 5% of export value. I would think requiring fees for permits do not violate free trade rules.
Another loophole is the “special VAT” on goods to and from Cambodia. Indonesia has two VAT rates — one for the import of luxury good and one for import of non-luxury goods. I trust that the new finance minister is smart enough to find a suitable solution to taxing Cambodia without violation Asean trade rules.
Why the 19% and 5% rates? Well, 19% is the same as Mr Trump’s reciprocal tariff on Cambodian exports to the US. If Cambodia has no problem paying 19% to Mr Trump, they should have no problem paying 19% on their exports to Thailand.
Based on 2024 trade data, our exports to Cambodia are 7.5 times larger than our imports, which is the reason for the large trade surplus with that country. Therefore, it is in our interests to keep this export flow high. The imposed 5% rate should be small enough to keep our products competitive in the Cambodian market but big enough to remind Cambodian consumers there is a price to pay if their government continues the border dispute with Thailand.
The fun part is the income from the export/import permit fees.
Again, based on 2024 figures, a 19% charge on Cambodian imports is about 8.2 billion baht and a 5% charge on exports to Cambodia is 16.2 billion baht. May I suggest that the 8.2 billion baht be used exclusively to build a permanent border fence? They caused the dispute and they can pay us to build that expensive fence.
It is estimated that the cost of building a permanent fence along the 800-kilometre border is 12 billion baht. The Thai government might not have enough for the job. This is the perfect source of funding. Construction work could start as soon as Thailand starts collecting import permit fees.
The 16.2 billion baht in export permit fees can be used to better the welfare of affected Thai citizens living along the border, such as rebuilding schools, repairing roads, and upgrading hospitals. Also, the funds can be used to boost the morale of the soldiers protecting our land.
Another advantage to reopening the border with fees is that Thailand Plus One, the regional supply chain programme, can work again. Companies in the programme would not only be able to secure necessary supplies from Cambodia, but also might be able to get a rebate on import permit fees. This will keep their costs unchanged. The Plus One programme is beneficial to the Thai economy as final products would be assembled in Thailand.
Cambodia would not like these permit fees, especially the fact the money will be utilised to build the fence to prevent them from encroaching on Thai soil. But what choice do they have?
They would have to find new markets to replace 48.5 billion baht of exports to Thailand. If they cannot, regardless of what their leaders say, the people of Cambodia will suffer.
Trying to replace Thai imports to save the 5% permit fee might prove to be counter-productive. Thai exporters can easily bear the burden of the price hike to maintain their market share in Cambodia. I think the quality of Thai products and business ties would override the incentives to find new suppliers.
The decision is then with Thailand. It is a great feeling to be in control of the game.
The first option is to keep the border closed and risk losing the 1.5% of GDP trade surplus. It is not an effective means to control product flow as 70% of Thai exports still leak into Cambodia and 50% of Cambodian products still reach the Thai market.
By the way, the 1.5% of GDP trade surplus is equivalent to more than 1 million jobs.
The second option is reopening the borders and collecting permit fees. The plus is that Thailand would have a free wall to prevent Cambodia bothering us for years to come, not to mention better welfare for affected citizens and soldiers serving our country.
My suggestions might not be to everyone’s liking. Please give them a thought. It is always nice to have options.