Panama has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Law No. 35 establishes a framework for the protection of trade secrets. Title IV of the Industrial Property Law regulates commercial and trade secrets and provides for liability for breaches of these provisions. In addition, Title IV of Executive Decree No. 7 of 17 February 1998 further implements and elaborates the rules set out in Law No. 35.

There is an obligation for passive infrastructure sharing in Panama to deliver telecom services to end users. It is practised in both the mobile and fixed sectors based on commercial agreements. As established by Art. 1 of the Resolution AN No. 2848-Telco and Annex A on Regulations for the installation, operation, and shared use of towers and/or structures that support telecommunications service antennas.

The government owns 49% of the shares of Cable & Wireless Panama, S.A., a Panamanian telecom company governed by private law.

Panama does not mandate functional separation for operators with significant market power (SMP) in the telecom market. However, there has been an obligation to separate the accounts since 1997. Pursuant to Art. 86 of "Executive Decree No. 73, which implements Law No. 31 of 8 February 1996 on telecommunications regulation in Panama", telecommunications service concessionaires must submit audited financial statements to the Regulatory Authority within three months of the end of their fiscal year. Under Art. 86.1, concessionaires that provide more than one telecommunications service may comply by either maintaining separate accounts for each service, or maintaining separate accounts by type of service (Type A and Type B). In addition, concessionaires providing mobile cellular telephone services are required to maintain separate accounts for that service.

In Panama, the legal basis for telecommunications licensing is set out in Law No. 31 of 8 February 1996 (Telecommunications Law) and its principal implementing regulation, Executive Decree No. 73 of 9 April 1997, which operationalises the statutory framework. The Telecommunications Law governs the installation, operation, and provision of telecommunications networks and services through concessions and authorisations, and it allocates core supervisory and enforcement powers to the sector regulator, the National Authority for Public Services (ASEP).
The Law establishes a dual regulatory classification. Type A services may be granted by the State under temporary exclusivity or to a limited number of concessionaires (Art. 7(1)), whereas Type B services are generally provided under conditions of free competition (Art. 7(2)). Consistent with this classification, ASEP identifies Type A services, including personal communication services and mobile services, while Type B services encompass a broader range of activities, including, inter alia, basic international telecommunications and fixed and mobile radio communications, among others.
In addition, Art. 1 of Law No. 36 imposes sector-specific constraints on licensing in mobile telephony by limiting the number of concessions to operate mobile telephony services to three, thereby consolidating the market structure.

Panama has not appended the WTO Telecom Reference Paper to its schedule of commitments.

Under Art. 13 of Law No. 22, when selecting contractors for the acquisition of goods and services, contracting entities in Panama are required to first consider the feasibility, availability, and quality of goods and services produced within the country. According to Art. 7 of Executive Decree No. 439, foreign companies wishing to participate in these selection procedures must reference any international agreements or treaties on reciprocity between their home country and Panama. Additionally, when contracting for goods and services, the tender documents must specify that the goods and services must be of national origin, production, manufacturing, or provision.

Art. 10 of Law No. 22 provides that the State must promote the competitive participation of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises in certain acts of contractor selection carried out by public institutions. Art. 88 of Executive Decree No. 439 further elaborates on the provision mentioned above, stating that in the case of minor procurement acts, the entity must select the proposal submitted by the micro or small enterprises, provided that it complies with the requirements and demands of the tender documents and the proposed price is not greater than 5 % in relation to the lowest price proposal submitted by another type of enterprise.

It is reported that transparency and accountability deficits persist in Panama’s government procurement practices. In 2020, Panama adopted Law 153 with the stated objective of modernising the public procurement framework and strengthening transparency. However, reported enforcement has remained uneven. A recurrent concern for foreign firms contracting with the Panamanian government is the delayed settlement of payments to suppliers and contractors. Investors also point to opaque procurement procedures, including instances where tender requirements are modified during the process, which raises concerns that bids may be structured to favour particular firms.
In addition, investors report corruption risks across levels of government and within the private sector, including alleged requests for kickbacks and the inflation of contract values by officials and intermediaries. Reports also allege that judges, mayors, legislators, and local officials have accepted bribes in connection with land titling and favourable rulings. Permitting and titling procedures are further described as lacking transparency, with civil servants allegedly soliciting payments at multiple stages.

Panama is not a party to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). However, the country has been an observer of the WTO GPA since 1997.

There are no foreign ownership limitations in sectors relevant to digital trade.

Panama is a signatory of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Information Technology Agreement (ITA) of 1996, but is not a signatory of its 2015 expansion (ITA II).

The State of Palestine lacks a comprehensive framework for consumer protection that applies to online transactions.