Author: pithayutr

on by

Tax Obligations and Compliance for Foreign Residents in Thailand

Under Thailand’s taxation framework, foreign individuals residing in the country are subject to specific tax obligations, particularly when they are also liable for taxation in other jurisdictions. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the Thai tax system for individuals residing in Thailand for 180 days or more, including the requirements for filing tax returns, allowable deductions, the application of Double Taxation Agreements, and penalties for non-compliance.

Tax Residency and Taxable Income in Thailand:

According to Thai tax law, an individual who resides in Thailand for a cumulative period of 180 days or more within a calendar year (1 January to 31 December) is classified as a “tax resident of Thailand.” Tax residents are subject to Personal Income Tax (PIT) on the following categories of income:

  1. Income Derived from Sources Within Thailand:
Such income is taxable regardless of whether it is paid within Thailand or abroad.
  1. Foreign-Sourced Income:
Such income is subject to Thai PIT if it is earned on or after 1 January 2024 and remitted to Thailand in any year. However, foreign-sourced income earned prior to 1 January 2024 is exempt from Thai PIT, even if remitted to Thailand on or after 1 January 2024.

Tax Return Filing Requirements:

Thai tax residents who earn income from sources within Thailand or who remit foreign-sourced income to Thailand (as described above) are required to file a tax return with the Thai Revenue Department within 31 March of the following year for the preceding calendar year’s income.

Deductions and Allowances:

Not all income is subject to taxation, as certain types of income are exempt, including severance pay up to a specified amount, retirement benefits, and bank interest that has already been withheld at source. Additionally, taxpayers may claim deductions for various expenses based on the type of income received.

Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs) and Tax Credits:

To mitigate the risk of double taxation, Thailand has entered into DTAs with various countries. These agreements aim to prevent income from being taxed in both Thailand and the country where it was earned. Foreign residents subject to Thai PIT may be eligible for either a tax exemption or a foreign tax credit, depending on the provisions of the applicable DTAs and the type of income involved.

Penalties for Non-Compliance:

Failure to comply with the above requirements results in fines and surcharges.

Conclusion:

Foreign residents in Thailand who meet the 180-day residency threshold must carefully navigate their tax obligations to ensure compliance with Thai tax law. This includes understanding the scope of taxable income, both from Thai and foreign sources, fulfilling tax return filing requirements, leveraging allowable deductions and DTAs benefits, and adhering to deadlines to avoid penalties. By maintaining accurate records and submitting properly certified documentation, taxpayers can effectively manage their tax liabilities and ensure compliance with the Thai Revenue Department’s regulations. 

Source: International Comparison December 2025: Antea

Read Full Article

on by

Cannabis: Stricter Controls with New Draft Ministerial Regulation

The Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) is progressing with a new draft ministerial regulation to impose tighter oversight on cannabis, prioritizing medical applications and consumer safeguards amid a notable decline in commercial outlets.

The draft, titled “Ministerial Regulation on Permits for Research, Export, Sale, or Processing of Controlled Herbs for Commercial Purposes (No. .. ) B.E. ….”, has received Cabinet approval and is undergoing review by the Office of the Council of State prior to final approval.

This update replaces the 2016 regulation, which is deemed insufficient for the evolving cannabis landscape. It introduces targeted mechanisms for commercial export, sale, and processing to safeguard public health and minimize community disruptions.

Principal Requirements Under the Draft Regulation:

•  Restricted Sales Venues: Commercial distribution limited to medical treatment facilities (with physician prescriptions and supervised dispensing), pharmacies, herbal product outlets, or traditional Thai medicine practitioner sites.

•  Staffing Standards: At least one employee certified by the Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine must be on duty during business hours.

•  Operational Guidelines: Mandatory efficient systems for odor and smoke elimination to avoid public nuisance; premises must be legally owned or possessed; dedicated storage with controlled temperature, humidity, separation from other items, and no direct floor contact.

•  Transitional Provisions: Current licenses are valid until expiry, but all renewals, new permits, or pre-enactment applications must adhere to the updated standards.

The MOPH has affirmed sufficient qualified medical professionals nationwide to support the framework and guaranteed uninterrupted access for patients requiring cannabis therapeutically through hospital-based prescriptions.

Recent data indicate substantial industry contraction: As of late 2025, 18,433 registered establishments existed nationwide, 8,636 expiring licenses in 2025, only 1,339 (15.5%) were renewed, resulting in over 7,297 closures and an estimated 11,136 remaining. Further expirations are anticipated: 4,587 in 2026 and 5,210 in 2027.

Many operators appear to be closing in anticipation of the elevated compliance thresholds rather than adapting.

Key Takeaways:

•  Medical-Centric Shift: Sales confined to regulated health-related venues, emphasizing prescription-based access over general retail.

•  Mandatory Business Upgrades: Requirements for infrastructure, storage, environmental controls, and trained personnel will challenge existing operators.

•  Industry Downsizing: Thousands of outlets have already closed without renewal, foreshadowing further consolidation.

•  Patient Protections: Therapeutic users assured continued supply via national hospital networks.

•  Implementation Timeline: Final enactment expected soon after review; broader policy direction may vary with future administrations.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

The Repeal of Selected National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Announcements and Orders in Thailand

On 29 December 2025, the Royal Gazette published the Act on the Repeal of Certain Announcements of the National Council for Peace and Order, Orders of the National Council for Peace and Order, and Orders of the Head of the National Council for Peace and Order That Are No Longer Necessary and Inappropriate for the Present Circumstances, B.E. 2568 (2025). This legislation repeals 55 such instruments in total: 48 take effect immediately on 30 December 2025, while 7 are repealed subject to specific conditions or transitional measures aligned with the original provisions.

This act represents a significant effort to eliminate remnants of the military junta’s authority, known as the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), which governed Thailand following the coup d’état on 22 May 2014.

Historical Context of the NCPO and Its Instruments:

The NCPO seized power in 2014, suspending the constitution and imposing martial law. During its rule until the 2019 elections, the junta issued hundreds of announcements and orders under absolute authority granted by Section 44 of the interim constitution. These instruments—comprising announcements by the NCPO, orders by the NCPO, and orders by its head—totaled over 500 and addressed political restrictions, administrative reforms, economic projects, security measures, and public order.

Many suppressed political activities, limited freedom of expression, and bypassed standard legislative processes, including environmental assessments and urban planning requirements for major projects. Although the NCPO dissolved in July 2019, Article 279 of the 2017 Constitution preserved the legal force of these instruments, requiring parliamentary action for repeal.

Previous partial repeals occurred in 2019 through NCPO Head Order No. 9/2562, which revoked approximately 61-87 instruments deemed to have achieved their objectives. Further limited repeals followed, but numerous orders persisted, prompting calls from civil society and political parties to address those infringing on rights or outdated.

Legislative Process Leading to the 2025 Repeal Act:

Efforts to repeal NCPO instruments gained momentum post-2019. In 2024-2025, multiple draft bills emerged from the Cabinet and opposition parties. The Cabinet initially proposed repealing 23 instruments in July 2024. Parliamentary committees, chaired by figures such as Chaturon Chaisang (Pheu Thai Party), consolidated these into broader legislation.

The House of Representatives approved the consolidated bill in July 2025, repealing up to 55 orders following debates on civil liberties, environmental safeguards, and administrative efficiency. The Senate endorsed it without opposition in September-October 2025. The final act, published on 29 December 2025, reflects this bipartisan consensus to align governance with democratic norms.

Scope and Impact of the Repeal:

The act targets instruments no longer necessary or incompatible with current conditions. The 48 fully repealed items include those restricting political expression, online monitoring, and certain security measures. The 7 conditionally repealed ones likely involve complex areas, such as urban planning exemptions for industrial projects or southern border administration, where transitional provisions prevent abrupt disruptions (e.g., potential lawsuits or policy gaps).

This repeal partially dismantles the NCPO’s legacy by restoring standard legal processes and enhancing civil liberties. However, some orders remain in force, particularly those integrated into permanent laws or requiring separate amendments. Ongoing reviews suggest potential future repeals.

In summary, this 2025 legislation marks a deliberate step toward normalizing Thailand’s legal framework, reducing the enduring influence of the 2014 coup-era junta while balancing continuity in governance. It underscores the role of parliamentary oversight in transitioning from authoritarian measures to democratic principles.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Penal Code Amendment (No. 30): Criminalizing Sexual Harassment and Implications for Workplace Policies

On December 30, 2025, the Royal Gazette published the Penal Code Amendment Act (No. 30), B.E. 2568 (2025), marking a significant advancement in Thailand’s legal framework for addressing sexual offenses. This amendment introduces “sexual harassment”  as a distinct criminal offense, refines existing provisions to reflect contemporary societal dynamics, and emphasizes protection for individuals across all genders, ages, and identities. By elevating such acts from minor infractions to criminal liability, the law seeks to deter perpetrators, enhance victim support, and foster a safer society. The changes address limitations in prior legislation, which often treated harassment merely as a petty offense causing annoyance, insufficient for the severity and diversity of modern incidents.

Key Changes Introduced by the Amendment:

The amendment encompasses several pivotal modifications to the Thai Penal Code:

1.  Expanded Definition of “Rape”: The definition is broadened to include emerging forms of sexual violation, ensuring inclusivity for diverse gender identities and modern contexts.

2.  Abolition of the Offense of “Indecent Act by Intrusion”: This provision is repealed to modernize and streamline the legal structure.

3.  Establishment of Sexual Harassment as a Criminal Offense: A new, dedicated section defines sexual harassment broadly as any act—physical, verbal, auditory, gestural, communicative, involving stalking, or conducted via computer systems—with sexual connotations that causes another person distress, annoyance, embarrassment, or a sense of insecurity. This encompasses:

       •  Physical actions or contact.

       •  Verbal remarks, sounds, or displays.

       •  Persistent communication, following, or monitoring.

       •  Digital interactions, such as through emails, social media, or online platforms.

These updates recognize the evolving nature of sexual offenses, including those affecting individuals of all ages, genders, and sexual orientations, and account for the psychological and physical harm inflicted.

Penalties Under the New Provisions:

Penalties are structured progressively to reflect the offense’s severity, context, and impact:

•  General Cases: Imprisonment not exceeding 1 year, a fine not exceeding 20,000 baht, or both.

•  Repeated or Continuous Acts (disrupting the victim’s normal life): Imprisonment not exceeding 2 years, a fine not exceeding 40,000 baht, or both.

•  Acts in Public Places or Via Computer Systems: Imprisonment not exceeding 3 years, a fine not exceeding 60,000 baht, or both.

•  Acts Against Children (under 15 years): Imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, a fine not exceeding 100,000 baht, or both.

•  Acts by Persons in Authority (e.g., supervisors, employers, or those with power over the victim): Imprisonment not exceeding 3 years, a fine not exceeding 60,000 baht, or both.

This graduated approach underscores heightened accountability in cases involving vulnerability, repetition, public exposure, digital means, or power imbalances, particularly relevant in professional settings.

Broader Implications for Society and Business Operations:

The amendment responds to the increasing prevalence and complexity of sexual offenses in Thai society, where traditional laws proved inadequate. By criminalizing a wider array of behaviors, it aims to improve enforcement, provide stronger deterrence, and offer more effective remedies for victims. For businesses, the law has profound implications, especially given the elevated penalties for acts committed by authority figures. Organizations must adapt to avoid criminal liability for individuals, potential vicarious responsibility, reputational harm, or related civil claims.

Businesses, particularly those with employee hierarchies, customer interactions, or digital operations, should undertake the following preparations:

•  Policy Revision and Development: Update or create comprehensive anti-harassment policies that explicitly incorporate the new legal definition, including workplace-specific examples such as inappropriate comments during meetings, unwanted advances by supervisors, or harassing digital messages.

•  Training Initiatives: Implement mandatory, regular training programs for all employees, with specialized sessions for managers highlighting their increased responsibilities and risks under the law.

•  Robust Reporting and Investigation Frameworks: Establish multiple confidential reporting channels (e.g., HR contacts, anonymous hotlines) and impartial investigation procedures with clear timelines, ensuring protection against retaliation.

•  Risk Mitigation Strategies: Conduct assessments in high-exposure areas, such as supervisory roles or public-facing positions, and integrate policy references into employment contracts and handbooks.

•  Victim Support Measures: Provide resources like counseling, accommodations, and legal referrals to support affected individuals.

•  Ongoing Monitoring: Perform annual reviews of policies and maintain detailed records of compliance efforts as evidence of due diligence.

Consultation with legal and human resources experts is recommended to ensure alignment with complementary laws, such as the Labour Protection Act and the Gender Equality Act.

Developing Effective Workplace Harassment Policies:

In light of the amendment, workplace policies must be thorough and proactive. Essential components include:

1.  Precise Definitions and Illustrations: Mirror the statutory definition while providing contextual examples relevant to the organization’s environment.

2.  Comprehensive Scope: Extend coverage to employees, contractors, clients, and visitors, including remote work and work-related events.

3.  Accessible Reporting Mechanisms: Offer diverse, secure options with prompt acknowledgment and anti-retaliation safeguards.

4.  Fair Investigation Processes: Detail impartial, timely procedures involving trained personnel and thorough documentation.

5.  Disciplinary Measures: Outline consequences proportionate to the offense, up to termination, while addressing power dynamics.

6.  Preventive Education: Require ongoing training to promote awareness and cultural change.

7.  Support Services: Ensure access to assistance for complainants and respondents.

8.  Regular Evaluation: Commit to periodic audits and updates in response to legal or societal developments.

Leadership endorsement and cultural commitment are crucial for effective implementation.

Key Takeaways:

•  The 2025 amendment represents a landmark progression in Thailand’s approach to sexual offenses, criminalizing harassment in its various forms and imposing substantial penalties, effective from December 30, 2025.

•  It particularly heightens risks for those in positions of authority, necessitating urgent workplace adaptations.

•  Organizations that prioritize robust policies, training, and procedures will not only achieve compliance but also cultivate safer, more inclusive environments.

•  This reform aligns with global standards for victim protection and societal safety, encouraging proactive measures across all sectors.

•  Employers are advised to stay informed through official sources, such as the Royal Gazette and relevant ministries, for any additional guidance or interpretations. Prompt action will mitigate risks and contribute to a more equitable professional landscape in Thailand.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

TISA Update – Government Responds to Industry Backlash with+ Proposed Reforms for Broader Equity Incentives

In a follow-up to our earlier publication, “Tax: Understanding TISA – Thailand’s New Tax-Incentivized Individual Savings Account for Thai Equities” (Tax: Understanding TISA – New Tax-Incentivized Individual Savings Account for Thai Equities – The Legal Co., Ltd.), which outlined the initial framework for the Thailand Individual Savings Account (TISA) as a promising tool to channel household savings into domestic equities amid Cabinet approval on December 9, 2025, recent developments reveal significant industry skepticism and swift governmental pledges for revisions. Just two days after the Economic Cabinet’s endorsement, Finance Ministry officials have announced plans to refine the scheme, addressing core criticisms that it lacks genuine incentives for stock investments, imposes tax traps on high earners, and fails to deliver structural market reforms. These adjustments aim to balance equity for low- and middle-income savers while restoring appeal for affluent investors, potentially injecting up to 1 trillion baht annually into the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET).

The backlash, led by analysts and echoed across financial media, highlighted TISA’s resemblance to outdated Long-Term Equity Funds (LTFs) rather than transformative models like Japan’s NISA or the UK’s ISA. Critics argued that the 800,000-baht aggregate tax deduction cap—encompassing TISA, Retirement Mutual Funds (RMF), Super Savings Funds (SSF), Thai ESG Funds (TESG), and other vehicles—disproportionately benefits only 15.9% of Thais who pay personal income tax (PIT), while the proposed income-tiered multipliers (1.3x for earners below 1.5 million baht annually, versus 0.7x for those above) could effectively raise taxes for high-net-worth individuals, deterring their participation as the market’s primary liquidity providers.

Addressing Key Criticisms: Proposed Amendments to Enhance Appeal:

Later on, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister convened stakeholders at the Ministry of Finance to review feedback, emphasizing that the contentious multipliers and income thresholds remain “preliminary models” subject to recalibration for fairness and efficacy. “We are not locking in any figures that could distort incentives or penalize savers; our goal is permanent, flexible long-term savings without the renewal uncertainties of past schemes like LTFs,” underscoring the scheme’s role in the “Quick Big Win” policy’s fifth pillar to combat Thailand’s declining savings rate (from 27% to 25% of GDP over the past decade) ahead of full aging society status.

Key proposed tweaks include:

1.  Refined Income-Tiered Deductions

       •  The 1.3x multiplier for sub-1.5 million baht earners (capping deductions at 1.04 million baht for 800,000-baht investments) will be retained to empower 11.4 million low- and middle-income households, but the 0.7x cap for higher earners (limiting them to 560,000 baht) is under review. Officials signal potential equalization to 1x across brackets or a graduated scale to avoid “tax traps,” ensuring high earners—who contribute over 60% of PIT revenue—retain motivation without subsidizing fiscal shortfalls exceeding 40 billion baht annually from prior incentives.

2.  Expanded Flexibility in Investments and Portfolios

       •  Unlike rigid predecessors, TISA will permit self-directed asset allocation across SET-listed stocks, bonds, ETFs, and mutual funds, with intra-account switches allowed without voiding deductions, provided a minimum five-year hold (or until age 55 for retirement-linked portions). This addresses complaints of a 55-year lock-in as overly restrictive, introducing up to 25% collateralization for emergency loans to enhance liquidity.

       •  A new 200,000-baht annual tranche, separate from the deduction cap, will exempt dividends, interest, and capital gains from tax—mirroring NISA’s success in boosting Japan’s investment-to-deposit ratio from 17% to 23.6% over a decade—directly countering the “no real return exemptions” critique.

3.  ESG and Thematic Boosters

       •  The 1.2x deduction multiplier for TESG investments remains, but with broadened eligibility to high-ESG or governance-scoring stocks, encouraging sustainable flows without mandating funds. This aligns with the SET’s Jump+ reforms, potentially channeling 100-200 billion baht yearly into green and blue economy sectors.

4.  Complementary Measures for Market Depth

       •  Parallel initiatives include monthly 1,000-million-baht issuances of “Savings Plus” government bonds (minimum 1,000 baht, app-based with full liquidity) and micro-insurance stamp duty exemptions to lower entry barriers. The Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) will also cut risk charges on equity investments from 25% to 18%, freeing up 100 billion baht annually from insurers for SET inflows.

These revisions, slated for Cabinet submission by late December 2025, target a July 1, 2026, rollout for the 2026 tax year, with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) finalizing eligible assets.

What Stakeholders Should Prepare for in the Revised Framework:

1. Individual Investors and High-Net-Worth Clients

•  Model 2025-2026 tax scenarios incorporating potential 1x equalization and the 200,000-baht exemption tranche; prioritize dividend-yield stocks (e.g., banking sector at 5-7%) for tax-free income.

•  Stress-test portfolios for five-year horizons with switch flexibility, using the 25% loan collateral as a safety net.

2. Financial Institutions and Brokerage Firms

•  Upgrade platforms for dynamic TISA tracking, including multiplier calculations and exemption reporting; prepare for a surge in retail accounts (targeting 5-10 million users initially).

•  Collaborate on educational webinars to demystify self-directed options, focusing on ESG to capture the 1.2x premium.

3. Listed Companies and Investor Relations Teams

•  Accelerate ESG disclosures and dividend policies to qualify for incentives, anticipating 20-30% retail ownership growth; leverage TISA for targeted retail roadshows.

4. Tax Practitioners and Certified Financial Planners

•  Integrate TISA into holistic plans, phasing out expiring ThaiESG limits (down to 100,000 baht by 2027); advise on the new child investment exemptions under Section 40(4) to enable intergenerational wealth transfer.

Key Takeaways:

•  TISA’s initial design drew valid industry fire for weak stock incentives and high-earner disincentives, but December 11 announcements signal responsive tweaks toward NISA-like exemptions and flexibility, preserving the 800,000-baht cap while adding a 200,000-baht tax-free layer.

•  Reforms prioritize low-income access (1.3x deductions) but eye balanced multipliers to sustain high-earner flows, potentially averting market liquidity dips and injecting 500 billion-1 trillion baht yearly into equities.

•  With Cabinet review imminent and 2026 implementation on track, stakeholders must adapt swiftly: recalibrate models, enhance platforms, and educate on self-directed perks to capitalize on this pivot toward enduring savings culture.

•  Beyond TISA, holistic reforms—like monetary easing and governance upgrades akin to Japan’s “three arrows”—remain essential for true market revitalization.

This evolving TISA framework could yet emerge as a game-changer, fostering inclusive long-term investing if revisions temper fiscal conservatism with bold incentives. Early movers in compliant portfolios and advisory services will reap the rewards of Thailand’s maturing capital markets.

Related Article: Tax: Understanding TISA – New Tax-Incentivized Individual Savings Account for Thai Equities – The Legal Co., Ltd.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Advancing Thailand’s Legal and Regulatory Reform under the OECD Framework

On 2 December 2025, the Cabinet acknowledged a progress report on Thailand’s legal and regulatory development under the cooperation framework with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Since 2018, Thailand has engaged in cooperation with the OECD through the Country Programme, with the objective of enhancing the effectiveness, transparency, and overall quality of its legal and regulatory framework. The Office of the Council of State (OCS) serves as the principal authority responsible for driving legal reform and promoting Good Regulatory Practices in Thailand.

Evolution of Thailand’s Legal and Regulatory Reform under the OECD Country Programme

Phase I of the Country Programme

During the first phase of the Country Programme, Thailand focused on establishing the institutional and legal foundations for good regulatory governance by aligning domestic practices with OECD standards. Key developments included:

  • The adoption of OECD good regulatory practices to support the implementation of the Act on Legislative Drafting and Evaluation of Law B.E. 2562 (2019); and
  • The implementation of capacity-building initiatives, including training programmes for government officials, to enhance regulatory quality and institutional effectiveness.

Phase II of the Country Programme

During the second phase of the Country Programme, the focus shifted toward enhancing regulatory quality to address emerging economic and social challenges, with particular emphasis on reducing regulatory burdens on citizens and businesses. Key areas of cooperation during this phase included:

  • The joint implementation of projects between Thailand and the OECD aimed at modernising the legal and regulatory framework;
  • The adoption of measures designed to reduce both the cost of living and the cost of doing business; and
  • The introduction of proportionality principles into Thailand’s regulatory impact analysis (RIA) framework to ensure that regulatory measures are commensurate with their intended objectives and impacts.

Overview of the OECD Assessment

The OECD assessment provides a comprehensive evaluation of Thailand’s regulatory policy framework, encompassing existing laws and regulations, institutional arrangements, governance structures, and regulatory instruments. It examines both ex-ante and ex-post regulatory impact assessments, as well as mechanisms for stakeholder consultation and engagement.

OECD Recommendations for Strengthening Thailand’s Regulatory System

The OECD proposes 15 key recommendations aimed at strengthening Thailand’s legal and regulatory framework and enhancing overall regulatory quality:

  1. Promote evidence-based policymaking – Systematically integrate RIA into policymaking processes at all levels and strengthen stakeholder engagement.
  2. Enhance transparency and accountability – Improve public reporting on the quality of RIAs and the conduct of public consultations.
  3. Share regulatory best practices – Encourage knowledge-sharing and peer learning among agencies with strong regulatory performance.
  4. Reinforce the role of the Office of the Council of State – Designate it as the central authority responsible for regulatory quality oversight and standard-setting.
  5. Build policy analysis capacity – Develop multidisciplinary competencies within the public sector, including economics, data analytics, and policy evaluation.
  6. Improve RIA and consultation guidelines – Establish clear and consistent standards regarding the evidence required for regulatory assessments.
  7. Initiate RIA at an early stage – Consider a range of policy options and define clear, measurable objectives from the outset.
  8. Introduce forward regulatory planning – Prioritize high-impact legislation and optimize the allocation of limited regulatory resources.
  9. Ensure ministerial accountability – Require formal ministerial sign-off on RIA summaries to reinforce responsibility for regulatory decisions.
  10. Clarify the timing of stakeholder consultations – Promote early engagement during the problem-definition stage of policy development.
  11. Extend public consultation periods – Increase consultation timelines in line with OECD good regulatory practices.
  12. Enhance the use of the central legal portal – Develop it into a two-way platform that supports transparency and facilitates public feedback.
  13. Review laws based on their impact – Allocate review resources strategically to maximize regulatory effectiveness and outcomes.
  14. Mandate post-enactment reviews – Ensure systematic and regular reviews of high-impact laws and regulations.
  15. Develop a whole-of-government regulatory delivery policy – Integrate risk-based regulation, targeted enforcement, and effective inter-agency coordination.

Implementation Approach for Thailand

Thailand will implement the OECD recommendations through a combination of short-term and long-term measures aimed at strengthening the effective enforcement of the Act on Legislative Drafting and Law Evaluation B.E. 2562 (2019).

Short-Term Actions

Short-term efforts will focus on planning, prioritization, and capacity-building, including:

  • The introduction of forward regulatory planning and enhanced public disclosure;
  • The prioritization of high-impact laws and regulations;
  • Improvements to public consultation processes; and
  • Training programs on good regulatory practices for relevant public officials.

Long-Term Actions

Long-term reforms will aim to strengthen analytical capacity and institutional oversight mechanisms, including:

  • The adoption of advanced regulatory impact assessment methodologies;
  • Stronger linkages between pre-enactment and post-enactment evaluations;
  • The establishment of dedicated regulatory support units; and
  • Enhanced transparency, monitoring, and reporting of regulatory outcomes.

Conclusion

The OECD assessment and recommendations provide a clear and coherent roadmap for further strengthening Thailand’s legal and regulatory system. Through the systematic and effective implementation of these 15 recommendations, Thailand can significantly enhance regulatory quality, transparency, accountability, and stakeholder participation.

These reforms will contribute to a more effective and responsive regulatory environment that supports sustainable economic and social development, while further aligning Thailand’s governance framework with OECD international standards and good regulatory practices.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Progress in Thai–U.S. Trade Negotiations

On 12 December 2025, Thailand’s Minister of Commerce announced that the United States had conveyed a positive signal regarding the advancement of bilateral trade discussions. Washington indicated its intention to request the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to commence technical-level negotiations on tariffs and trade matters with Thailand.

This announcement follows intensified high-level engagement between both governments. In recent discussions, the U.S. President identified trade as a principal priority, committing to accelerate negotiations and reaffirm previous undertakings. The Department of Trade Negotiations within Thailand’s Ministry of Commerce has confirmed that technical-level discussions between Thailand and the United States are currently underway, with the 19% tariff rate on Thai goods remaining in effect. However, the resumption of technical-level dialogue indicates that future adjustments may be possible, underscoring the importance for businesses to remain vigilant and prepared.

Furthermore, the Thai Minister of Commerce reported that during her meeting with the U.S.–ASEAN Business Council (USABC), American companies and USABC members consistently advocated for both governments to expedite trade negotiations to unlock additional commercial and investment opportunities. Accelerated progress would benefit U.S. companies operating in Thailand, Thai exporters, and American consumers by facilitating access to high-quality products at competitive prices. This is particularly significant for sectors where the United States maintains import dependency, including Thai jasmine rice and other agricultural commodities, as well as broader manufacturing and supply-chain operations connected to Thailand.

The development has been characterized as an encouraging indication that the U.S. administration shares Thailand’s commitment to strengthening economic relations through a stable and predictable trade and taxation framework, notwithstanding broader geopolitical considerations. According to the Minister, such a framework would support sustainable growth in bilateral trade and investment while providing enhanced certainty for cross-border business planning.

Implications for Investment Structuring and Risk Management

The renewed trade engagement between Thailand and the United States necessitates a reassessment of existing investment structures and contractual arrangements. Export-oriented enterprises and operations integrated into U.S.-linked supply chains should evaluate corporate structures, transfer pricing mechanisms, and long-term commercial agreements to ensure continued operational efficiency under both the current tariff regime and potential future modifications. Strategic legal and tax planning can assist investors in mitigating compliance and cost-related risks while maintaining flexibility to capitalize on more favorable trade conditions as negotiations advance.

Conclusion

These developments represent a favorable outlook for investors and businesses with exposure to Thai–U.S. trade relations. Renewed momentum in bilateral negotiations reinforces confidence in Thailand as a strategic trade and investment destination while emphasizing the critical importance of proactive legal and regulatory planning. Investors, importers, exporters, and multinational corporations are advised to monitor these negotiations closely, as forthcoming developments regarding tariffs, trade regulations, and approval processes may directly impact investment structures, operational costs, and market access opportunities.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Government Measures to Promote Film Production in Thailand: Key Incentives and Regulatory Requirements

On 2 December 2025, the Cabinet of Thailand approved the Measures to Promote Film Production in Thailand (the “Measures“), designating the Ministry of Culture as the principal authority responsible for their implementation. The Ministry of Culture is mandated to prescribe the relevant eligibility criteria, incentives, and implementation procedures in accordance with the Cabinet’s approval.

The Thai film industry is recognized as a creative industry with substantial potential in terms of both economic contribution and the promotion of Thailand’s national image on the global stage. Pursuant to the government’s strategy to enhance the competitiveness of creative industries, Thai films have been designated as a Flagship Creative Industry with the capacity to compete with foreign productions and stimulate economic activity across multiple related sectors.

Objectives of the Measures

These Measures are designed to support and strengthen Thai film production at both domestic and international levels and encompass the following objectives:

  • Promote high-quality Thai film production – To support the production of films that meet international standards, thereby enhancing the competitiveness of Thai films in the global market.
  • Enhance industry competitiveness – To strengthen the capabilities of Thai film operators through skills development, infrastructure improvement, and market access expansion.
  • Support cultural exports and soft power – To leverage film as a medium for promoting Thai culture internationally and reinforcing Thailand’s soft power presence abroad.

Benefits Under the Measures

These Measures provide financial support to eligible Thai film productions to encourage high-quality content, enhance industry competitiveness, and promote Thai culture internationally.

Main Benefit

Eligible film projects with a production budget of at least THB 15 million are entitled to financial support equivalent to 15% of qualifying production expenses per project.

Additional Benefits

Supplementary financial support can be granted if certain conditions are met, as set out below:

  • Creative Content Incentive – Film projects presenting innovative storylines or creative content addressing the issues as prescribed by the Subcommittee on the Promotion of Film Production in Thailand under the Ministry of Culture, the applicant shall be eligible to apply for an additional incentive of 5%.
  • High-Budget Production Incentive – Film projects with production costs ranging from THB 40 million to less than THB 50 million will receive an additional 2.5% incentive. Film projects with production costs of THB 50 million or more will receive an additional 5% incentive.
  • International Screening Incentive – Film projects screened in cinemas or broadcast on television in at least four foreign countries or released on a streaming platform accessible in at least four foreign countries (with at least one country located outside Southeast Asia), will receive an additional 5% incentive.

Applicant Qualifications

Applicants seeking benefits under these Measures must satisfy the following criteria:

  • Thai Ownership – The applicant must be a legal entity in which more than 50% of the shareholding is held by Thai nationals, with at least one-half of the directors or managers being Thai nationals.
  • Operational History and Compliance – The entity must have been in operation for a minimum of two years and be duly registered with the Department of Business Development and other relevant government authorities. The applicant must have filed corporate income tax and value-added tax returns and maintained audited financial statements.
  • Copyright Ownership or Rights – The entity must either (i) own the copyright in the film, which must qualify as a Thai work, or (ii) lawfully hold the relevant copyright or exploitation rights obtained from a Thai copyright owner.
  • Business Purpose – The entity must operate in the film industry or related sectors, with such business objectives expressly stated in its business registration certificate filed with the Department of Business Development or other relevant authorities.
  • Office in Thailand – The entity must maintain its principal office or an establishment in Thailand that serves as an operational business location or official contact point.
  • Production Expense Threshold – The relevant film project must incur production expenses of at least THB 15 million per project within Thailand.

Conditions of the Measure

These Measures are implemented under the Thai Government’s framework. The Committee for the Consideration of Financial Support under these Measures (the “Committee”) is responsible for reviewing all financial documents and verifying compliance with regulations prescribed by the Revenue Department.

  • Legal Compliance – Film projects must fully comply with Thai laws and must not be subject to any legal disputes.
  • Eligible Expenses – Financial support covers costs incurred during the pre-production, production, and post-production stages. Expenses related to marketing and publicity, overseas expenditures, interest, gifts, entertainment, or prizes are excluded.
  • Exclusive Incentive – Film projects that received financial support or were granted incentives under other measures implemented by the Thai government shall not be eligible to apply for or receive support under these Measures.
  • Approval Requirement – Film projects must be reviewed and approved by the Film and Video Review Committee under the Film and Video Act B.E. 2551 (2008) or otherwise comply with the criteria prescribed by the Ministry of Culture.
  • Eligible Productions – Eligible productions include Thai films, Thai television series, and Thai music videos.
  • Revocation of Benefits – Approved incentives may be revoked under the following circumstances:
    • The applicant fails to produce the film or submit the required documents within the prescribed timeframe.
    • The content of the film violates Thai law or misrepresents, undermines, or damages Thailand’s image or national institutions.

Procedures for Submission of an Application for Entitlement to Financial Support

Application Submission

Applicants who meet the above-mentioned qualifications are able to submit the documents to apply for eligibility to receive financial support up to 2 times per year during the following periods.

  • Round 1: 1 January – 31 March
  • Round 2: 1 July – 30 September

Review and Approval

The Committee shall review the applications and approve eligible applicants as recipients of financial support within 60 days from the date of submission.

Production Timeline

Applicants approved as eligible recipients of financial support must complete the film production within 2 years from the date of approval. Applicants shall initially advance and bear all production costs at their own expense and subsequently submit an application for reimbursement.

Claiming Financial Support

  • Upon completion of the film production, applicants shall submit all required supporting documents for the application for financial support to the Committee within 90 days from the date of completion, in accordance with the approved production period.
  • An auditor appointed by the Committee shall review the submitted documents within 90 days.
  • The Committee shall review all documents verified by the auditor and approve the reimbursement in accordance with the said Measures within 60 days from the date of receipt of such documents with the said Measures and disburse the reimbursement to the eligible recipient of the financial support.
  • An eligible recipient who has already been granted the principal incentive (i.e., 15% of production costs per film) under these Measures and who wishes to apply for additional incentives under these Measures shall submit the relevant supporting evidence within 3 years from the date of approval of the financial support.

Current Program Status

The Cabinet has approved the underlying principles of these Measures, and the Ministry of Culture is currently preparing the detailed implementing measures for submission to the Cabinet for final approval. However, due to the dissolution of Parliament, final approval will be deferred until the formation of a new Cabinet.

Conclusion

These Measures aim to enhance the quality and competitiveness of Thai films while supporting the development of industry professionals. These Measures are expected to stimulate investment, create employment opportunities, and promote Thai culture through films, series, and music videos to audiences both domestically and internationally. Overall, these Measures contribute to strengthening Thailand’s national image and advancing the creative economy.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Medical Data: Balancing Privacy and Legal Needs in Inheritance and Liability Cases

In Thailand, the disclosure of medical records involves a delicate balance between protecting patient privacy and enabling access for legitimate purposes, such as legal proceedings. A landmark 2025 ruling by the Official Information Board’s Appeal Committee (Social Affairs, Public Administration, and Law Enforcement Branch) illustrates this principle: a public hospital initially refused to release a deceased patient’s treatment history, but the board overturned the decision, ordering disclosure to support a civil lawsuit.

Case Summary: Authorized Representative Seeking Records for Tort Claim

The appellant sought the medical treatment records of “Ms. K.” (a pseudonym), their full sibling who had passed away. The hospital denied the request, citing privacy concerns.

On appeal, the Committee found that:

  • The appellant was acting under a power of attorney granted by “Mrs. B” (the mother of the deceased and a legal heir).
  • The records were needed to support a tort lawsuit alleging medical negligence that contributed to Ms. K.’s death.
  • Since the patient was deceased and unable to request the records herself, the authorized representative was exercising rights on her behalf.
  • This was pursuant to the Ministerial Regulation No. 2 (B.E. 2541 (1998)) issued under the Official Information Act, B.E. 2540 (1997), which allows designated representatives to access information when the data subject is incapacitated or deceased.

The Committee explicitly ruled that this did not constitute a request for “another person’s health information” under Section 7 of the National Health Act, B.E. 2550 (2007). After weighing the agency’s legal duties, public interest, and private benefits, the board concluded that disclosure was justified, with appropriate redactions for unrelated personal data.

This decision reinforces that authorized heirs or representatives can access deceased patients’ records for legitimate legal purposes without violating core privacy protections.

Key Legislation Governing Medical Record Disclosure:

  1. Official Information Act, B.E. 2540 (1997) Public agencies, including state hospitals, must disclose official information upon request (Section 11). Exceptions include personal data where disclosure would unreasonably invade privacy (Sections 14-15). Appeals against refusals are handled by the Official Information Board, whose rulings are binding. Ministerial Regulation No. 2 (B.E. 2541) specifically permits representatives to act for deceased or incapacitated individuals.
  2. National Health Act, B.E. 2550 (2007) Section 7 protects health information privacy and restricts disclosure of “another person’s” data without consent. However, as clarified in this ruling, requests by authorized representatives of deceased patients fall outside this prohibition when tied to legal rights.
  3. Personal Data Protection Act, B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). Health data is sensitive personal data requiring strict protection. Exemptions apply for legal claims, compliance with law, or court processes. Disclosures mandated by the OIB under the OIA are generally permissible.
  4. Medical Profession Act, B.E. 2525 (1982), and Hospital Regulations. These impose confidentiality on healthcare providers but allow exceptions for legal obligations or authorized requests.

How These Laws Interact:

The system operates through complementary layers:

  • Patient/Representative Rights vs. Third-Party Requests: Direct access (by patients or proxies) is facilitated under the National Health Actม B.E. 2550 (2007)  and OIA regulations, while unrelated third-party requests face higher barriers.
  • Privacy vs. Justice: Hospitals often invoke Section 7 of the National Health Act, B.E. 2550 (2007) or PDPA to refuse, but the OIB can override when disclosure serves legal accountability (e.g., malpractice suits) without undue harm.
  • Deceased Persons’ Data: Post-mortem privacy persists, but heirs’ inheritance or liability claims create legitimate interests, resolved via representative powers under OIA regulations.
  • Enforcement Mechanism: OIA appeals provide an administrative remedy, binding on public agencies. Parallel court subpoenas or PDPA complaints may arise in complex cases.

This ruling sets valuable precedent for families pursuing medical negligence claims after a relative’s death. Individuals facing similar denials should document authorization (e.g., power of attorney from heirs) and appeal through the Official Information Commission (oic.go.th). Consulting legal experts or the Ministry of Public Health can further clarify rights in such sensitive matters.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Medical Advertising: Criminal Fraud Convictions for Doctor, Clinic Owner, and Agency in Misleading Stem Cell Campaign

In a landmark ruling delivered by the Criminal Court in 2025, three parties—a licensed physician, the owner of a private medical clinic, and the advertising agency they hired—were found guilty of criminal fraud under Section 341 of the Penal Code. The case centered on misleading online advertisements for stem cell therapy and anti-aging treatments. All three received prison sentences and fines, marking one of the strongest judicial responses to date against false medical advertising in Thailand.

Summary of the Court’s Findings:

The court determined that the defendants jointly created and published advertisements on Facebook and Line that contained the following false or exaggerated claims:

  • “Stem cell therapy can cure diabetes, high blood pressure, and knee degeneration permanently.”
  • “100 % success rate with no side effects”
  • “Patients will look 10–20 years younger after one treatment.”

The advertisements used before-and-after photos of patients (without proper consent or medical evidence) and included fabricated testimonials. When patients paid between 280,000 and 650,000 baht per course, they received only standard vitamin infusions or platelet-rich plasma (PRP), not the promised stem cell therapy.

The court ruled that:

  • The physician knowingly allowed his name and medical license to be used in the deceptive ads
  • The clinic owner approved and paid for the campaign despite knowing the claims were impossible to fulfill
  • The advertising agency designed the content, posted it, and collected the advertising fee, fully aware of the falsehoods

All three were convicted of fraud by deception, causing property loss to the victims (Section 341 Penal Code) and of violating the Medical Profession Act B.E. 2525 (1982) (using a physician’s name in misleading advertising) and the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979) (false advertising).

Sentences Imposed:

  • The doctor: 2 years imprisonment (suspended for 4 years) + 200,000 baht fine
  • The clinic owner: 2 years 6 months imprisonment (suspended for 5 years) + 300,000 baht fine
  • The agency director: 2 years imprisonment (suspended for 4 years) + 200,000 baht fine

The court also ordered all three defendants to pay compensation totaling 4.2 million baht to the 12 victim-patients who filed complaints.

Relevant Laws Applied in the Judgment:

  1. Penal Code, Section 341 – Fraud by deception causing property loss (maximum 3 years imprisonment and/or fine)
  2. Medical Profession Act B.E. 2525 (1982), Section 27 – Prohibits physicians from allowing their name to be used in false or exaggerated advertising.
  3. Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979), Section 22 – Prohibits false, deceptive, or exaggerated advertising that may cause misunderstanding
  4. Medical Facilities Act B.E. 2541 (1998) – The clinic’s license was placed under review for allowing unethical advertising.

How These Laws Interact:

  • The Penal Code provides criminal punishment for the actual financial harm caused to patients.
  • The Medical Profession Act targets the doctor’s ethical breach and can lead to license suspension or revocation by the Medical Council.
  • The Consumer Protection Act allows the Consumer Protection Board to impose additional administrative fines and bans on advertising.
  • When all three laws are applied together, the court can impose both imprisonment and compensation, while the professional council and government agencies handle long-term sanctions (license loss, business closure)

Key Takeaways:

  • Shared Criminal Liability: For the first time, the entire chain—physician, clinic owner, and advertising agency—was held jointly criminally responsible for fraudulent medical ads.
  • No “Ignorance” Defense: Doctors cannot claim innocence by saying they merely lent their name; agencies cannot hide behind “client instructions” if they know claims are false.
  • Severe Consequences: Beyond fines and suspended sentences, defendants face civil compensation and potential professional sanctions (e.g., license revocation).
  • Patient Protection Strengthened: Victims can pursue remedies through criminal complaints, Consumer Protection Board filings, or Medical Council reports.
  • Deterrent Effect: The ruling signals stricter enforcement against exaggerated health claims, especially in high-value treatments like stem cells and anti-aging therapies.

Significance of the Ruling:

This judgment sends a clear message that misleading medical advertising is not merely an ethical violation but can constitute criminal fraud when it induces financial loss. Patients who have paid for treatments after seeing similar online ads are strongly encouraged to retain evidence (screenshots, receipts, chat records) and file complaints with the Consumer Protection Board, the Medical Council, and/or the inquiry officer.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles