This paper demonstrates the supply chain of Thailand’s automotive industry with
emphasis on the recent changes in its composition and the impacts of FTAs. A
systematic analysis of production and trade data are conducted and further
supplemented by insights from in-depth firm-level interviews conducted between
February and April 2011. The key finding is that there were changes in the automotive
industry’s supply chains after the country was selected to be a production platform for
most of the major players in the international auto industry. The first observed change
is the change in emphasis in export composition from auto parts to CBU vehicles. The
second change is that the locally manufactured vehicles are not served only domestic
market but also by the regional market. There is an exception of one-ton pick-up trucks
which are sold world-wide including to Europe and the Middle East. The final change
in the supply chain is the steady increase in the vehicle’s local content.
We conclude that FTAs have contributed to the recent changes in the nature of Thai
automotive supply chains, but only for outputs, not inputs. In particular, the preferential
tariff offered under FTAs with ASEAN and Australia have facilitated regional vehicle
trade. All vehicles traded between Thailand and ASEAN members, and Australia,
applied for preferential tariff rates offered in the FTAs. In other words, official records
of preferential trade are more or less the same as the actual trade (i.e. 100 per cent of
FTA utilization). The high FTA utilization rate is due to the huge tariff margin, the
nature of the production process and the long experience in dealing with government
officials. By contrast, we find that FTAs do not have any significant impact on auto
parts regional trade. While changes in the international trade pattern were observed,
such changes naturally happen, without any influence from FTAs. The low FTA
utilization rate was due to the low tariff margin and the restrictive effect of ROO on
auto parts trade so that the role of FTAs on these trade flows seems to be limited.
Two policy lessons can be drawn from our paper. Firstly, changes in the nature of
the supply chain are largely driven by economic fundamentals and business
opportunities. There is limited room for policy-makers to influence such changes in
favor of their indigenous suppliers. Secondly, FTAs have the potential to promote trade
358
for items which remain subject to high tariffs, such as CBU vehicles. Their tradepromoting
effects are subject to certain conditions, including specific characteristics of
the automotive industry which is highly concentrated and led by a handful of car
makers; the nature of the production process in which local content increases naturally;
and the long experience of car makers which are familiar with measures like ROO. It
seems risky to generalize the example of vehicles to other industries. By contrast, the
pattern of utilization rate between imports and exports suggests that the tariff margin
matters. When the tariff margin is low, the presence of ROO discourages firms to make
use of FTA preferential trade. To promote the use of FTAs for narrow tariff margins,
ROO-free items should be introduced.