Key takeaways

No single international filing route is best for every business. Choosing between direct filing, the PCT, or the Madrid Protocol depends on several factors together — IP type, number of target countries, business timing, and budget. This article gives you a framework of questions to think through, but it is not individualized legal advice — an actual decision should involve a professional who knows the specifics of your business.

Factor 1: Type of IP

Patents and trademarks use different international systems — patents use the PCT or direct filing; trademarks use the Madrid Protocol or direct filing. If your business has both, consider them separately (see What Is the PCT? and What Is the Madrid Protocol?).

Factor 2: Number and identity of target countries

If you already know exactly which one or few countries you need protection in, direct filing there may be more straightforward and easier to budget. If you're not yet sure, or you need protection in several countries, an international system (PCT for patents, Madrid for trademarks) lets you file an initial application before committing to every target country. Either way, check whether your target countries are members of the system you're considering — if not, you'll need to file there directly regardless.

Factor 3: Business timing and product-development stage

If your product is still under development, or your business isn't ready to commit to every target market yet, a system that defers the decision — like the PCT for patents — may suit you better, giving you more time to assess the situation before committing spend to each country. If your product is ready to launch and your target countries are already clear, direct filing may be faster in some cases.

Factor 4: Budget and spending timing

The total cost of filing in multiple countries tends to be significant regardless of route, but international systems like the PCT and Madrid help defer the point at which you commit to large national fees in each country, compared to filing directly in multiple countries all at once. This can suit businesses managing cash flow carefully or still raising funding. This article doesn't state exact fee figures, since they vary by number of countries, claims, and the classes of goods/services chosen — request a real cost estimate based on your specific target countries.

Factor 5: Number of jurisdictions and flexibility needed

The more target countries you have, the more an international system tends to reduce duplicate paperwork. But if your business needs high flexibility — for example, target countries or market strategy might change often — consider how well your chosen route accommodates that. The PCT, for instance, lets you defer the choice of destination countries for a period, as explained in Entering the National Phase.

Factor 6: Existing base applications in Thailand or abroad

If you already have a patent or trademark application or registration in Thailand or another country, it may serve as the basis for a Paris Convention priority claim (within the applicable time limit) or as the basic mark for a Madrid Protocol filing (for trademarks). Check the filing date and status of the existing application before deciding on a route, since priority claim windows are time-limited.

Factor 7: Enforcement and commercialization priorities

Consider how effective IP enforcement is in each target country, and when your business actually plans to operate there. Registering in a country where you have no near-term plan to do business may not justify the ongoing cost of maintaining that registration. Prioritize target countries based on your actual business plan, not every theoretical possibility.

No single route is best for every case

These factors often trade off against each other — a limited budget with many target countries may mean trading off some flexibility, or urgent business timing may make direct filing the better fit even with several target countries. This article is a framework to help you prepare before consulting a professional, not legal advice that substitutes for advice tailored to your specific situation.

Tavich Taweewatanapan
Reviewed by Tavich TaweewatanapanCompany Director and Registered Patent Agent · Reviewed 2026-08-14