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

June 6, 2022

How Franchise Businesses Should Respond to Thailand’s New Data Protection Law

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) entered into force in full on June 1, 2022. The PDPA, which contains similarities to the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) introduces obligations and restrictions relating to the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data in Thailand. While the new law applies to franchisors and franchisees in the same way that it applies to other businesses, there are a number of issues that are of specific importance in franchise businesses.

As franchisors and franchisees have the power and duty to make decisions concerning the collection, use, and disclosure of customers’ and employees’ personal data in the course of their operations, they are considered “data controllers” under the PDPA. The Trade Competition Commission of Thailand, via its Notification on the Guidelines for the Consideration of Unfair Trade Practices in Franchise Businesses issued under the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017), defines a franchise relationship as one which, among others, involves an element of control by the franchisor over the business operations of the franchisee. It follows then that in some situations, franchisees’ collection, use, and disclosure of personal data will be according to the instructions of their franchisors. In such circumstances, a franchisee will be considered a “data processor” under the PDPA.

Whether acting as data controllers or data processors, franchisors and franchisees must nonetheless comply with the requirements of the PDPA in the course of their operations. To ensure their activities are in compliance with the law, franchise businesses should consider five major actions:

1. Auditing existing data collection and retention practices

Whether operating online or via a brick and mortar shop, it is increasingly common for franchise businesses to store and process customers’ personal data. This may include the storage and transmission of credit card information for auto-billing systems, or the collection of customers’ names, addresses, birthdays, and shopping preferences for loyalty programs. From the use of facial recognition technology and other biometric identifiers to access coworking spaces, to the collection of health and genetic data by fitness centers, the collection and use of sensitive personal data is now commonplace as businesses strive to improve customer experiences through personalization.

Under the PDPA, the collection of such sensitive personal data requires explicit consent from the data subjects. Franchisors and franchisees must evaluate their existing data collection practices to identify compliance gaps. For example, apart from consent requirements, the PDPA requires the collection of personal data to be limited to the extent necessary in relation to the lawful purposes of the data controller. Data controllers are also required to ensure that any personal data collected remains accurate, up-to-date, and complete, and that it is not misleading.

The PDPA allows businesses to continue using personal data collected prior to June 1, 2022, for the original purposes of its collection. However, the businesses must also provide and publish a consent withdrawal method for data subjects to opt out from the data controller’s continued collection and use of their personal data.

2. Developing PDPA-compliant policies and systems

Compliance with the PDPA goes beyond appointment of data protection officers and use of privacy notices and consent forms. Apart from putting in place a PDPA-compliant privacy policy, it is also vital for franchisors and franchisees to review existing arrangements with third-party service providers in Thailand, including any outsourced service providers, suppliers, and advertising agencies. This serves to ensure that any data processing activities carried out by third parties that may collect, use, and disclose customers’ personal data pursuant to the franchisor’s or franchisee’s instructions are in compliance with the PDPA.

As data controllers, franchise businesses are required by the PDPA to establish proper internal systems to delete or destroy collected personal data upon the end of the retention period or when the personal data collected is no longer relevant or exceeds the scope of necessity, or when requested by the data subject. Franchise businesses must also establish a system to notify and handle data breach incidents. Under the PDPA, data controllers must notify the Personal Data Protection Committee of data breach incidents without delay, with a statutory notification window of 72 hours from the time of becoming aware of the incident. In the event of a data breach incident that has a high risk of affecting the personal rights and liberties of data subjects, a franchise business as a data controller must also notify affected customers of the incident and the remedial measures taken to address it.

The PDPA also requires data controllers and data processors to adopt appropriate security measures to prevent loss of and unauthorized or unlawful access to personal data. In this regard, franchise businesses may wish to consider investing in relevant software and technology to facilitate compliance with the PDPA. However, it is important that the use of any third party software and technology not conflict with restrictions in existing master franchise agreements.

3. Ensuring compliance by franchisors based overseas

Master franchisees often have a contractual duty to keep their franchisors informed of significant legal developments impacting the franchise business in the franchise territory. Master franchisees and their overseas franchisors should note that due to the extraterritorial application of the PDPA, overseas franchisors will similarly need to comply with the PDPA in their provision of goods or services to data subjects, and in their activities related to the monitoring of the behavior of data subjects based in Thailand.

Furthermore, the PDPA requires data controllers based outside of Thailand, such as overseas franchisors, to appoint and authorize a representative physically based in Thailand to act on their behalf in relation to all matters concerning the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data under the PDPA.

The PDPA also imposes restrictions on transfers of personal data outside of Thailand. When transferring personal data overseas, the PDPA requires the relevant destination country or organization that receives the personal data, such as of the foreign franchisor’s country of residence, to have sufficient personal data protection standards, and for the transfer to be conducted in accordance with any relevant rules that may be prescribed by the Personal Data Protection Committee established under the PDPA.

4. Updating franchise agreements and franchise operations manuals

Franchisors should also review and update their existing franchise agreements to account for compliance with the PDPA. In addition to standard clauses requiring a franchisee to ensure compliance with applicable personal data protection laws such as the PDPA, franchisors should consider including robust provisions on franchisees’ data processing obligations, security audit requirements, and compliance training obligations in their franchise agreements. Further, while it is already standard practice for franchisors to require their franchisees to obtain various types of insurance policies, such as general liability insurance, workers’ compensation insurance, and property insurance, with the increased risk in cybersecurity threats and the risks they pose to customers’ personal data, franchisors should also now consider requiring franchisees to obtain cybersecurity insurance.

Franchise operation manuals should also be updated so that they are aligned with the obligations imposed under the PDPA. For example, under the PDPA, data subjects, such as consumers and employees of franchise businesses, have various rights in relation to the collection, use, and disclosure of their personal data. This includes, among others, the right to access their personal data, the right to require their personal data to be provided in a commonly used electronic form or to be sent to another data controller (also known as the right to data portability), and the right to correct or delete their personal data.

5. Conducting compliance training for employees and other stakeholders within the organization

Compliance training is crucial to ensure that all relevant stakeholders in the franchisor’s and franchisee’s organizations understand the implications of the PDPA on the franchise business. This is also of particular importance for foreign franchisors that are subject to the GDPR, which requires data controllers to be able to demonstrate compliance with the accountability principle under the GDPR.

Franchisors and franchisees should conduct PDPA compliance training for their employees in Thailand so that the employees understand what they can and cannot do with customer information. For example, franchises operating in the education sector, such as preschools, day care centers and language schools, should train teachers and administrative staff on the handling of minors’ personal data. The PDPA imposes different obligations on data controllers in relation to consent requirements for collection of minors’ personal data. While parental consent is necessary for minors below 10 years old, parental consent may not be required for matters in which a minor between 10 and 20 years old is deemed competent to provide consent—in which case the minor’s consent alone is sufficient. The adoption of technology in provision of services, such as the use of CCTVs and parent-teacher communication applications where photographs and videos of children’s activities are shared and tracked, further elevates the importance of PDPA-compliant training among teaching faculty.

Noncompliance with the PDPA can expose franchise businesses to significant monetary and reputational risks. Under the PDPA, franchisors and franchisees acting in their capacity as data controllers are subject to administrative fines of up to THB 5 million (approximately USD 145,500), as well as criminal fines of up to THB 1 million (approximately USD 29,100). Thai courts are also empowered to award punitive damages, as well as impose imprisonment for up to one year. Similarly, franchisees acting as data processors can also be subject to administrative fines of up to THB 5 million  (approximately USD 145,500). Hence, franchisors and franchisees must be aware of their obligations under the PDPA and take steps to ensure that their data collection, use, and disclosure practices are aligned with the demands under the new law.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore
Read More
August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
Read More
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
Read More
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
Read More