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

January 25, 2013

AEC: Moving Toward a Common Market for Financial Services

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

A common market for financial services will be one of the major components of the ASEAN Economic Community when it takes effect at the end of 2015. This will represent a significant change for securities regulation in Thailand, where the Securities and Exchange Act, subject to some exceptions, places substantial restrictions on the offering of foreign securities in Thailand.

The change is occurring in phases. As one of the early changes, an exception has been made with respect to the offering of foreign mutual funds—or foreign collective investment schemes, as they are called in the SEC regulations.

Mutual fund management is among the securities businesses regulated under the Securities and Exchange Act. The Act defines mutual fund management as the management of investments under a mutual fund project by issuing investment units of each project for sale to the public, and using the proceeds to invest in, or seek profit from holding securities, derivatives, or any other properties, or to invest in or seek profit by other means.

The law provides that a securities business can be undertaken only by a limited company, a public limited company, or a financial institution established in accordance with other laws, after obtaining a license from the Minister of Finance on the recommendation of the SEC. The SEC licensing process is quite thorough, and there are numerous restrictions and requirements.

The securities company may set up and manage a mutual fund only when its application to set up the fund has been approved by the SEC in accordance with the regulations of the Capital Market Supervisory Board, which is also an extensive process.

Chapter 3 of the Securities and Exchange Act sets out the basic provisions for public offerings of securities. On the topic of mutual funds, it is written in a way that it does not apply to the offer for sale of newly issued investment units of a securities company licensed to manage mutual funds. However, in the case of a foreign company operating a foreign mutual fund, such company would not have undergone the licensing process, and thus would not be able to avail itself of the exception. Clearly, this would create a barrier to the cross-border offering of mutual funds within ASEAN.

To address this issue, a special exception exists for collective investment schemes established in certain ASEAN countries, which have been approved by their home regulators. The exception applies only to ASEAN countries whose securities regulators are members of IOSCO (the International Organization of Securities Commissions) in the category of Signatory A to the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding on Consultation, Cooperation and Exchange of Information.

In brief, the regulation provides an exemption from the requirements of Chapter 3 of the Act, for those foreign collective investments that meet certain conditions. Importantly, all units of such funds can be offered only to institutional or high-net-worth investors (each as defined in SEC regulations).

Among other requirements, the foreign collective investment scheme has to have a brokerage firm (licensed by the Thai SEC) responsible for trading its units in Thailand, as an authorized representative. The fund must also have a representative in Thailand to handle disclosing and sending information to investors, as required by law or regulations of the relevant home regulator. The local representative must also be appointed to receive notices, orders, warrants, and any other documents, on behalf of the foreign fund or the person responsible for operating it.

To meet the conditions for the exception, the foreign fund must be subject to regulation, which is similar to that provided by the Thai SEC. For example, it must have an investment policy that provides for investment in similar assets and investment ratios for mutual funds under the relevant SEC notification. The foreign fund must have actually been offered for sale in the jurisdiction in which it is regulated by its home regulator, and it must not be subject to a prohibition imposed by the home regulator with respect to trading in units of the scheme.

There are also requirements for the person responsible for undertaking the foreign collective investment scheme. This person must be subject to supervision by its home regulator, and the home regulator must have the authority to impose sanctions or order the responsible person to act or refrain from acting, in the case of any action likely to damage investors’ interests. Such person must not be subject to a suspension or revocation order imposed by the home regulator, and must not have a record of violating laws or regulations pertaining to disclosure of material information to investors or to the home regulator.

Securities companies that act as authorized representatives for trading the securities are also subject to their own set of rules. Among these, a securities company may only offer those foreign funds that the Thai SEC has examined, approved, and listed on its website. The verification process is addressed in a separate regulatory notification and requires extensive documentation and information.

This regulation is a major step forward, in that it provides a pathway for foreign collective investment schemes to be offered lawfully in Thailand. Although the above is just a summary and other requirements apply, it is evident that the SEC’s approach provides for freer trade in financial services, while maintaining investor protection. The ultimate winner is the investor, as more mutual funds awill be offered in Thailand from sources across eligible ASEAN member countries.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 17, 2025
Thailand’s draft Emergency Decree on Technology Crimes Suppression, which we covered in a client alert in January 2025 primarily addressed to telecom operators and financial institutions, is expected to have significant implications for a wide range of business operators.  The draft emergency decree has already been approved by the cabinet but may undergo further developments as it continues in the legislative process. In this article, we will highlight the material impacts of the draft emergency decree on overseas and local fintech operators. Expanded Definition of “Technology Crimes” The definition of “technology crimes” now includes the following acts of forgery or alteration: Forging or altering the identity of individuals and biometric characteristics by utilizing computer or communication systems or other electronic means to commit offenses. Forging or altering symbols, trademarks, or seals of groups (e.g., foundations, community enterprises) or juristic persons, including acts by juristic persons using individuals or juristic persons as nominal directors or shareholders, regardless of whether such individuals or legal juristic persons reside in Thailand. Forging or altering digital or online platforms, regardless of the platform’s location or legal status. Individuals who conspire, utilize, assist, or support the commission of these offenses will face the same penalties as the principal offender. Business Operator Definition The scope of “business operators” is now expanded to cover various fintech and digital asset operators beyond those under the Payment Systems Act (PSA). The draft emergency decree now includes the following operators, whether they are legally authorized or not: Business operators under the PSA and business operators who operate “as if” they are payment system operators Business operators under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses or business operators who operate “as if” they are digital asset business operators. Foreign exchange business operators. Disclosure and Exchange of Information Business operators must disclose
January 30, 2025
The Thai cabinet has approved a draft amendment of the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes as proposed by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to strengthen measures against technological crimes, particularly targeting call center scams and cyber fraud. Following the Council of State’s review, the emergency decree will be become effective immediately upon its enactment and publication in the Government Gazette. While the draft amendment is not yet publicly available, the government recently indicated that the emergency decree aims to empower authorities with decisive measures to combat cybercrime effectively. It underscores the shared responsibility among various sectors, including banking, telecommunications, and online platforms, in safeguarding against technological crimes. Key provisions of the draft amendment of the emergency decree include: Telecommunications provider obligations: Telecommunications service providers must suspend SIM cards associated with criminal activities. The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission and mobile service providers themselves are authorized to temporarily suspend mobile phone numbers if there is reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activities. Banking responsibilities: Financial institutions are required to promptly report mule accounts to the Anti-Money Laundering Office to facilitate quick restitution to victims. The Anti-Money Laundering Transaction Committee is empowered to order the return of funds to victims without requiring a final court ruling. Penalties for noncompliance: The amended emergency decree introduces penalties for noncompliance by regulated entities that fail to prevent criminal activities for offenses related to technology crimes in the following cases: Digital asset services: Those engaged in the buying, selling, or exchanging of digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies and digital tokens, as well as digital asset businesses that launder money obtained from online crimes by converting it into digital currency, will be subject to imprisonment for up to one year, a fine of up to THB 100,000,
January 22, 2025
Tasked with implementing the Politburo’s policy outlined in Notice No. 47-TB/TW dated November 15, 2024, the prime minister of Vietnam issued Decision No. 1718/QD-TTg on December 31, 2024, appointing himself as the head of a steering committee dedicated to the establishment of an international financial center in Ho Chi Minh City and a regional financial center in Da Nang by 2025. The Ministry of Planning and Investment has subsequently drafted an outline for the National Assembly’s Resolution on the Establishment of Regional and International Financial Centers in Vietnam (“Draft Resolution”). This Draft Resolution introduces two key policy groups: (i) policies governing the quantity, location, structure, organization, functions, and responsibilities of the financial centers; and (ii) policies applicable to various areas and matters within the financial centers. Notably, under the Draft Resolution, fintech has been identified as a key sector, with a specific focus on the implementation of a “controlled sandbox” policy for business models involving virtual assets and cryptocurrencies. Under this framework, transactions related to virtual assets and cryptocurrencies will be permitted from July 1, 2026, subject to licensing, management, impact assessment, and risk oversight by the financial centers’ Management and Operations Committee. Scope of Application and Key Principles The Draft Resolution applies to a wide range of stakeholders, including investors, regulatory agencies, organizations, and individuals involved in the establishment, organization, and operation of regional and international financial centers in Vietnam. These financial centers will have clearly defined geographical boundaries and specific locations, which will be further specified and detailed by the People’s Committees of Ho Chi Minh City and Da Nang. Companies successfully registered as members of these financial centers will benefit from special investor-friendly policy principles, which may differ from the general legal and regulatory framework applicable in other parts of Vietnam. Most notably, the state will
January 13, 2025
The State Bank of Vietnam’s Circular No. 50/2024/TT-NHNN regulating safety and security for the provision of online services in the banking sector (“Circular 50”), issued on October 31, 2024, took effect on January 1, 2025, with delayed effectiveness for certain provisions on (i) network, communication, and security systems, online banking application software, and mobile banking application software (July 1, 2025); (ii) transaction confirmation for payment transactions conducted via the straight-through processing method (January 1, 2026); and (iii) authentication forms and reporting obligations (July 1, 2026). The cybersecurity situation in Vietnam is complicated, and the banking and finance sector has been one of the top targets of high-tech criminals. Circular 50 seeks to enhance user protection by expanding the technical requirements to more services in the banking sector as well as standardizing how transactions are authenticated. Expanded Scope of Services Covered Previous regulations on safety and security of online services in the banking sector only covered banking services and intermediary payment services. Circular 50 expands the scope to include other services of credit institutions and foreign bank branches such as credit information services, foreign exchange services, securities depository services, and services related to factoring and letters of credit, which now need to comply with technical requirements and standards for online services such as firewalls and DMZ network barriers. Risk-Based Approach to Authentication Circular 50 sets out standards for payment transactions and card transactions by: Classifying various online transactions based on the type of client, the purpose of the transfer, the value of the specific transaction, and the total value of certain transactions during the day; and Applying various types of authentication for the corresponding types of online transactions, e.g., using passwords or PINs for small-value online transactions, and using OTPs (through SMS, voice, or email), biometric matching, or e-signatures for