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

September 3, 2019

Understanding Cannabis Liberalization in Thailand

Informed Counsel

On February 19, 2019, by amending the Narcotics Act B.E. 2522, Thailand caught the cannabis industry by surprise and became the first Asia-Pacific country to legalize medicinal cannabis. While hemp had been approved for use in industry since 2018 (see here), the amendment of the Narcotics Act B.E. 2522, providing for a Thai FDA registration pathway for medicinal cannabis, was largely unexpected.   

While the amendments create the foundation for a cannabis industry in Thailand, the true viability and future of the Thai cannabis industry lies in its regulation by both the Thai FDA and the Narcotics Control Board. With the return of an elected government, a new cabinet was sworn in on July 16, 2019, with the Bhumjaithai Party appointed to oversee the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH). The Bhumjaithai Party campaigned on further expansion of liberal cannabis policies, which was well received by the public. With the minister in charge of instituting regulations that further define the scope and use of cannabis for medical purposes, we can only expect further liberalization and clarification.

Some recent clarification was seen by way of helpful MoPH notifications that identified forms of medical cannabis allowed for approved use. These include (i) registered drugs per the Drug Act; (ii) Thai traditional medicines having approved compositions (now 16 formulas); and (iii) drugs approved for Thailand’s Special Access Scheme. Also further clarified were the specific qualifications of Thai traditional practitioners having authority to prescribe traditional cannabis medicines.

Most recently, two additional notifications from the Narcotics Control Board were enacted concerning the labels of medical cannabis products, and the forms for recording inventory movements of medical cannabis.

The exact Thai FDA medical cannabis licensing pathway is to be set out in Implementing Regulations that have been circulated widely for both official and public comment. These are expected to be approved by the MoPH very soon. As the regulations look to move things forward—and the government wants exactly that—no significant change in the regulations is expected before they become law.

As the Narcotics Act and draft Implementing Regulations currently stand, a complex network of who can be licensed for what purposes seeks to ensure control over the process for the beginning stages. There are currently four types of licenses: (1) production, (2) importation/exportation, (3) sale, and (4) possession. There are currently seven entities under both the Narcotics Act and the draft Implementing Regulations who can apply for medical cannabis licenses: (1) public entities, (2) healthcare professionals, (3) private universities, (4) collective farmers, (5) international transportation agencies, (6) traveling patients, and (7) groups to be permitted by further decisions of the MoPH. A further seven entities are set out in the draft Implementing Regulations.

The draft Implementing Regulations also address which parties can engage in which activities. Certain licensed activities are available to some entities, but not to others. For example, a healthcare professional is ineligible for a license to possess cannabis for the purpose of addiction treatment, but can be licensed to possess cannabis for R&D purposes. Further clarification will come with promulgation of the draft Implementing Regulations. The listing of successful Thai FDA license applicants on the Thai FDA website (as is the case with other Thai FDA regulated products such as human and animal pharmaceuticals, medical devices, food, cosmetics, and hazardous substances) will also provide more clarity. 

Foreign participation in Thailand’s cannabis industry is severely restricted for the first five years, starting from February 19, 2019. During this period, only state agencies may obtain a license to produce, import, or export cannabis. However, a private entity, with an office in Thailand and at least two-thirds of directors, partners, or shareholders having Thai nationality, may act jointly with a state agency to acquire or share these types of commercialization licenses. In this way, certain companies can be involved in the Thai cannabis industry from its inception. There are no restrictions requiring joint participation in R&D efforts (i.e., non-commercialization).

It is my opinion that the current regulation’s exclusion of foreign participation is an unfortunate corollary of Thailand’s clear intention for cannabis to be Thailand’s new cash crop. While foreign entities can certainly create local Thai subsidiaries and then apply for a partnership, it is unclear whether the MoPH would support this kind of application, or whether it would receive unjustified additional scrutiny. The Patent Office has even taken action to prevent foreign competition by rejecting, on questionable grounds, seven cannabis patent applications from foreign applicants. (For more on this, and critiques on the Patent Office’s approach, see here and here.)

Thailand’s actions to intentionally exclude foreign participation at the current stage of the industry calls into question its commitment to several major World Trade Organization (WTO) treaties. Further, Thailand’s revocation of foreign cannabis patent applications likely violates the WTO TRIPS agreement.

Fortunately, the Narcotics Act’s allowance of new categories of entities (category 7 above) to acquire licenses as the MoPH sees fit is open-ended and, with a party that fought for liberal cannabis policies at the reins, promising. With a population currently in need of medicinal cannabis, the facilities established by the government might not be able to supply enough medical-grade cannabis for the current need or to supply it quickly enough. This need for assistance may open the door for foreign entities to enter the market and provide access to enough medicinal cannabis to meet demand.

The current state of regulation provides three basic approaches for any foreign entity looking to enter the Thai cannabis industry. For most of the approaches, extensive work with government regulatory agencies and coordinating joint operations with state agencies will be needed.

The first approach is to import materials into Thailand. Getting the materials into Thailand, whether for distribution or for research & development, will be necessary in the near future as there are no materials to source within Thailand at the moment. This could mean as little as importing finished products ready for distribution, or as much as importing seeds, plants, supplies, personnel, facilities, or other necessities for production or research.    

The second approach is to establish domestic manufacturing facilities for the production of cannabis and cannabinoid products. Establishing domestic production in Thailand would be beneficial for several reasons. First, Thailand has a long history of agricultural knowledge in cannabis production, and great facilities for R&D exist through research institutes such as universities and pharmaceutical companies. Second, Thai production comes at a low cost and is associated with a record of safe manufacturing practices for ingestible products. This can be done either by sourcing materials and personnel from within Thailand or by using what was imported in the first approach.   

The third approach is to use Thailand as a headquarters for expansion into other Asia-Pacific regions, such as Laos, the next prospective country to follow Thailand’s lead in legalizing medicinal cannabis, or China. Depending on the business model, this could include using production facilities in Thailand to export products throughout Asia-Pacific, establishing networks in the region, or acting as an intermediary between producers and consumers.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
August 10, 2026
On June 17, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 on Nutritional Information on Processed Food Labels. The new regulation, which revokes three previous nutrition labeling regulations, introduces several notable changes affecting food and beverage manufacturers, importers, and distributors. These changes range from updated nutrient reference values and serving-size requirements to the introduction of the Nutri-Level front-of-pack labeling system for certain beverage products. Businesses operating in Indonesia should carefully review these developments and assess their products’ compliance with the new requirements during the transition period. Implementation of the Nutri-Level Labeling System To implement the recently issued decree on Nutri-Level labeling, BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 stipulates the requirements to implement the Nutri-Level labeling system on the front-of-pack. Under the new framework, ready-to-drink beverages, powdered beverages, and liquid or solid concentrates are required to display Nutri-Level labeling on the front label of their packaging. The Nutri-Level labeling system classifies products into color-coded levels A through D based on their sugar, sodium, and total fat content. The applicable Nutri-Level is determined based on the lowest level measured in the assessment of sugar, sodium, and total fat content. For products classified as level C or D, the Nutri-Level label must be accompanied by information on the relevant sugar, sodium, and total fat content per 100 ml of the ready-to-consume product. Products classified as level A or B may either display only the Nutri-Level designation or display the Nutri-Level together with the relevant nutritional information per 100 ml. Minimum Vitamin and Mineral Content Required for Declaration BPOM Regulation No. 10 of 2026 introduces a stricter threshold for the declaration of vitamins and minerals in the nutritional value information section (ING). Vitamins or minerals may only be declared if they are present at a
August 10, 2026
The drug registration process in Vietnam will be simplified, particularly for foreign applicants, following the recent issuance by Vietnam’s Ministry of Health (MOH) of a new circular that is expected to reduce administrative hurdles. Circular No. 32/2026/TT-BYT on the registration of drugs and medicinal ingredients (Circular 32) was issued on July 29, 2026, and will take effect on October 1, 2026, replacing Circular No. 12/2025/TT-BYT. Key provisions of the new circular are discussed below. Five-Year Data Exclusivity and Five-Month Public Disclosure Framework Circular 32 updates data protection guidelines by explicitly referencing Article 128 of the amended Intellectual Property Law, which sets out that new drugs supported by clinical trial data submitted for the first time will be granted a five-year data exclusivity period from the date of the initial marketing authorization (MA) approval. Subsequent applications that rely on the originator’s protected data will not be eligible for approval from the date of submission of the originator’s registration dossier until five years after the first MA is granted. Furthermore, in accordance with the new regulations, the regulatory authority must publicly disclose information on subsequent applications five months before the granting of MA, providing originator companies with an opportunity to exercise and enforce their intellectual property rights. Simplified Requirements for Foreign Legal Documents Circular 32 expands the circumstances under which legal documents issued by foreign authorities are exempt from consular legalization and authenticity verification requirements. Specifically, such documents may be exempt if the Drug Administration of Vietnam (DAV) is able to verify their authenticity directly through official electronic means, including written confirmation or email correspondence sent directly to the MOH by the competent foreign authority, or publicly accessible English-language databases maintained by recognized foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the new circular permits the submission of electronic notarized copies of legal documents
July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.