For foreign trademark owners filing a US application through WIPO seems the obvious choice due to the ease and apparent limited cost of filing. However, US trademark law differs in a number of ways from many countries and a WIPO filing rather than national may be more troublesome (and expensive) than it seems.
As high as 93% of US applications filed through WIPO currently lead to an office action, versus roughly 55 % of nationally filed applications. There are multiple reasons for this. For instance, US has stringent requirements about use. The application may only cover goods on which the applicant has a genuine intent to use (or is currently using in US commerce). As other countries often have a much broader specification, the USPTO Examiner will likely issue an office action when they are not convinced of a genuine intent to use on each and every item covered, resulting in additional costs and time delays in obtaining registration, along with the real possibility of unintentionally committing fraud, and further penalties in connection therewith. There are additional requirements including consents (if the mark contains the name of a living individual), requirements for an actual street address and disclaimers which, if not addressed at the time of filing, lead to further office actions.
If an applicant still wishes to file through WIPO, it would be best served by reviewing the matter with a US attorney and limiting their coverage for the US application when filing to conform more closely with US practice.
TAKEAWAY: Due to USPTO requirements re coverage, use and other factors, a filing through WIPO may be more costly, take longer and yield less ideal results rather than filing nationally.