You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

November 7, 2011

Procurement Contracts and Their Impact on Pharmaceutical Companies

PReMA Life

Concerns raised by the Thai pharmaceutical industry in recent years of alleged corrupt practices by employees of state hospitals, has led to the implementation of more stringent legislation to combat the problem of state funds seeping through a porous pharmaceutical procurement system.

Due to the fact that sales of pharmaceutical products to state hospitals by pharmaceutical companies have typically been conducted through procurement contracts, the existing system has long been open to possible abuse, which has stoked increasing concerns among legislators and administrators, both within the government and in state hospitals.

However, with the active enforcement of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the recent implementation of the UK Bribery Act, foreign pharmaceutical companies are finally delving deeper into the practices of their sales teams and demanding more transparency.

The main concern is that companies without a strong culture of compliance may not attempt to implement these stricter sales rules, which would result in an unbalanced market.

Notification on Procurement Contracts

This objective of raising transparency in government and state agencies has led to the recent implementation of the Notification re: Rules and Procedures Concerning the Preparation and Disclosure of Revenue and Expenses Accounts of Projects in which Individuals or Juristic Entities Are Contractual Parties with Government Agencies (Notification), on August 11, 2011, by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). This notification arose as a direct result of the amendment of the Organic Act on Counter Corruption dated April 12, 2011.

The Notification, which will become effective on January 1, 2012, stipulates that private sector entities that enter into procurement contracts with government agencies will now be required to prepare, and electronically submit, annual revenue and expense accounts to the Revenue Department, as well as their Corporate Income Tax Return for juristic entities.

The Notification will significantly impact entities in the private sector that enter into government procurement contracts, including individuals, Thai companies, and foreign companies with a local presence. The definition of “government agencies” is quite broad and includes government hospitals such as Siriraj Hospital, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, and Bhumibol Adulyadej Hospital

One important factor introduced is that the threshold for reporting is set relatively low, as all government procurement contracts with a value of THB 500,000 or more will be subject to the disclosure requirement. Businesses will also be required to submit one revenue and expense account for each contract, and to retain supporting documents for at least five years.

The Notification also states that government agencies should set a condition requiring businesses that enter into procurement contracts to receive and make payment via a current account, with the exception of payments that do not exceed THB 30,000, which can be made in cash.

Government contracts executed before January 1, 2012, will not be subject to this new disclosure requirement. However, if any material amendments are made to such contracts after January 1, 2012, they will also be subject to the disclosure requirement.

Although failure to comply with the new disclosure requirement does not entail criminal penalties, the sanction imposed under the Notification is commercially severe: violators will be disqualified from entering into new procurement contracts with government agencies. In addition, failure to comply with the reporting requirement, or incorrect reporting, could result in scrutiny by the NACC, the Revenue Department, and other relevant government authorities.

The new reporting requirement will place a substantial burden on the private sector, because it requires a separate detailed report for each contract, and contract values exceeding the low threshold of THB 500,000 will subject entities to the reporting requirement.

Impact on Pharmaceutical Companies

Pharmaceutical companies frequently enter into procurement contracts with government agencies, as defined in the Notification. Since most of these procurement contracts exceed the threshold of THB 500,000, pharmaceutical companies will now be required to provide detailed information for each procurement contract. When pharmaceutical companies provide discounts or donations to hospitals, these are sometimes not officially part of the procurement contract. It is therefore questionable whether these items need to be disclosed under the Notification.

Nonetheless, foreign companies must carefully assess the legality of such discounts or donations in pharmaceutical procurement contracts and the impact of the Notification on these aspects of procurement.

The approach adopted by the pharmaceutical company’s headquarters is also an important factor that must be taken into consideration. In any event, the company must ensure legality by implementing measures to lower the possible risk of action being taken by Thai regulators as well as foreign governments. In principle, the firm must at least ensure that a receipt is issued, the recipient is not an individual, and also verify that the money is used by the hospitals, etc.

The worldwide legal framework on corruption is changing, leading to more harmonized rules. However, the environment still remains a difficult one for companies to operate in, because some practices are strongly ingrained in some countries. Thus, despite the introduction of the new regulations in Thailand, the extent to which the new requirements will be implemented by the new government still remains uncertain.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 14, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand and Vietnam chapters to Investigations in Southeast Asia, a comprehensive guide published by Drew Network Asia (DNA). The resource provides a practical overview of anticorruption laws, corporate investigations, and compliance frameworks across six key Southeast Asian jurisdictions. Designed for in-house counsel, compliance officers, and risk management professionals, the guide offers actionable insights for navigating complex cross-border regulatory challenges and establishing effective, regionally coordinated compliance and investigation strategies. The guide begins with a regional perspective on enforcement trends and cross-border cooperation initiatives. Jurisdiction-specific chapters follow a standardized structure—covering primary corruption offenses, enforcement authorities, corporate liability, investigation procedures and dawn raids, whistleblower protections, and recommended compliance measures. In addition to country-by-country analysis, the publication highlights best practices for conducting internal investigations, managing digital evidence, and handling parallel proceedings involving multiple regional or international regulators. The guide serves as a practical reference for organizations operating in Southeast Asia. Because legal and regulatory risks depend on specific industry sectors and operational contexts, readers seeking tailored advice are encouraged to contact the authors listed in each chapter. The full guide is available for download through the button below or directly from the DNA website.
April 28, 2026
Thailand’s Anti-Corruption Cooperation Committee has issued a major update to the anticorruption standards required for private entities engaging in high-value state projects. The update, titled “Announcement re: Procurement Limits and Minimum Anticorruption Standards (No. 2),” replaces and amends key provisions of the original announcement dated September 25, 2024. Published in the Government Gazette on April 10, 2026, the new rules take effect on May 10, 2026, and apply to projects valued at more than THB 300 million (approximately USD 9.3 million). The key amendments to the anticorruption standards are detailed below. Expanded Definition of Conflict of Interest The 2026 regulation significantly broadens the scope of what constitutes a conflict of interest compared to the 2024 version, which focused primarily on basic kinship and business ties. Under the new rules, a conflict of interest includes using one’s position or authority to seek benefits for oneself, a group, close associates, or business, including through business relationships, kinship ties, or relationships with spouses or individuals living together as partners without marriage registration. The 2026 announcement also introduces specific examples that were largely absent from the 2024 text, such as holding shares in similar businesses that submit proposals for the same project, or submitting proposals for projects in which a relative, spouse, or unregistered partner is an “involved party” in that procurement. Continuous Compliance: The “Final Payment” Rule Under the 2024 rules, the coverage period for anticorruption policies was less strictly defined. The new regulation mandates a continuous timeline: policies or certifications must remain effective from the date of bid submission until the contractor receives the final payment installment under the contract. If a certification or policy is set to expire before the final payment, the contractor must submit a new self-audit form and supporting evidence to the state agency before the original
January 8, 2026
Doing business in Thailand means operating under a strict regulatory framework. From time to time, companies may receive unexpected administrative orders from government authorities that restrict their operations, impose new compliance obligations, or levy fines and penalties. When this happens, a business may challenge the order under Thailand’s administrative law system. The primary concern in pursuing administrative litigation is timing, as strict statutory deadlines apply and missing them can permanently affect a company’s rights. First Step: Administrative Appeal Many companies assume the first step is to immediately bring the matter before the Administrative Court to seek revocation or suspension of the order. Some even attempt to request an interim injunction to stop the order from taking effect. However, Thai law generally requires that the company first challenge the order through an administrative appeal with the same agency that issued it. Only after this process is complete can the matter be taken to court. Seeking an interim injunction at this stage is also not possible. This is because Thai law does not allow a standalone application for an interim injunction; an injunction can only be requested together with the underlying complaint filed with the Administrative Court. Since a court complaint cannot be filed until the administrative appeal process has been exhausted, an injunction is usually not available at the early stage. What Are the Timeframes for Administrative Appeal? Thailand applies a two-stage administrative appeal process. The appeal must first be submitted to the same authority that issued the order, which will review its own decision. If that authority affirms its decision, the appeal is then escalated to the relevant higher authority for further review. In most cases, both stages must be completed before a company is allowed to proceed to court. The timeframe for filing an administrative appeal is very
December 3, 2025
Recent high-profile corporate fraud and accounting scandals have brought increased scrutiny to governance, compliance, and enforcement practices in Thailand, highlighting the legal and practical challenges facing companies operating in the country. As regulators and law enforcement authorities sharpen their focus on financial misconduct, cybercrime, and corruption, businesses must navigate a complex and evolving investigative landscape. Tilleke & Gibbins’ investigations and compliance team examines these issues in the Thailand chapter of The Practitioner’s Guide to Global Investigations – Tenth Edition, published by Global Investigations Review (GIR). The chapter provides a detailed overview of Thailand’s legal framework for corporate investigations, offering practical guidance for companies and counsel responding to regulatory and criminal scrutiny. The Thailand chapter covers key topics including corporate criminal liability, enforcement priorities, internal investigations, data protection considerations, dawn raids, whistleblowing, cyber-related investigations, and cross-border cooperation. It also addresses emerging issues such as cybersecurity enforcement, economic sanctions compliance, and anticipated developments affecting investigations in Thailand. The chapter is authored by John Frangos, Chitchai Punsan, Alongkorn Tongmee, Michael Ramirez, Piyawat Vitooraporn, and Michelle McLeod. The Thailand chapter is available as a PDF below, and the full guide can be accessed on the GIR website.