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​ 

June 7, 2024
On March 7, 2024, Laos moved to regulate the management of foreign-currency income from the exportation of goods and services. Effective March 29, 2024, Decision No. 333 (formally the Decision on Management of Income in Foreign Currency from Exportation of Goods and Services No. 333/BOL) from the Bank of Lao PDR (BOL) aims to incentivize the inflow of such foreign currency into Laos and its sale to licensed commercial banks. Decision No. 333 sets minimum required proportions for importing income in foreign currency derived from the exportation of goods and services, as well as the timeframe for doing so. It also stipulates the requirements for selling such foreign currency to commercial banks in Laos and the minimum proportions that must be sold. Importing Foreign-Currency Income Exporters must receive payments from abroad via bank transfer into a dedicated bank account designated for import-export business activities within the timeline specified in the sale-purchase agreement, but not exceeding 180 days from the date of export. Each sector must import income in foreign currency into the Lao PDR according to the minimum proportion of currency to be imported, and it must be done within the required timeframes, as specified in the table below. The ratios and timeframes are subject to change depending on the circumstances. If exporters cannot comply with the required ratio and timeline, exporters must provide relevant explanatory documents for the BOL’s consideration. Selling Foreign-Currency Income Exporters of goods and services must sell at least the minimum required proportion of their foreign-currency income (see table below) to a commercial bank in Laos. This foreign currency exchange must occur within three working days of receiving the foreign currency into the dedicated bank account in Laos. The selling rate will be determined by the prevailing rate of the commercial bank on the day
June 3, 2024
On May 24, 2024, the Central Bank of Myanmar (“CBM”) issued a public notice warning individuals against participating in the sale, purchase, exchange, or transfer of unregulated digital currencies, as well as unauthorized money transfers. The CBM has indicated its readiness to enforce regulations by closing bank accounts and pursuing legal action, which may result in imprisonment, fines, or both, in accordance with the Central Bank of Myanmar Law, the Anti-Money Laundering Law and the Financial Institutions Law. The CBM is the sole legal entity authorized to issue currency in Myanmar, as stipulated in the Central Bank of Myanmar Law. The CBM does not recognize digital currencies as official currency, nor has it granted permission to financial institutions within Myanmar to trade them. The existing legal framework, comprising the Foreign Exchange Management Law and the Financial Institutions Law, further cements the illegality of cryptocurrency transactions within the nation’s borders. Four years ago, in May 2020, the CBM issued Notification No. 9/2020, prohibiting all persons residing in Myanmar from engaging in the sale, purchase, or exchange of unregulated digital currencies. The list of prohibited currencies includes widely recognized cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin (BTC), Litecoin (LTD), Ethereum (ETH), and Perfect Money (PM), with a particular emphasis on transactions conducted through personal Facebook accounts and web pages. Before the issuance of the 2020 notification, the CBM had announced that anyone engaging in digital currency transactions did so at their own risk, but no enforcement measures were being taken at the time. However, after the 2020 notification was issued, the CBM has pursued legal action against persons involved in illegal currency conversion and unauthorized hundi money transfers using Tether (USDT). These enforcement measures have included shutting down bank accounts and initiating legal proceedings under the Anti-Money Laundering Law and the Financial Institutions Law.
May 30, 2024
A bank guarantee or bond is a powerful tool that provides contractual parties with security and assurance. Bank guarantees are commitments made by a bank (as a guarantor) on behalf of a customer (as an obligor) to a beneficiary to ensure that certain contractual obligations will be fulfilled. If the customer fails to comply with these obligations, the bank can compensate the beneficiary up to the amount specified in the bank guarantee. Bank guarantees are widely used in Thailand as a form of security and are common in construction agreements and government procurement contracts, among others. If the beneficiary (e.g., a project owner) concludes that the counterparty in the agreement (e.g., a contractor) has breached the underlying contract in some way, the beneficiary will demand payment from the bank pursuant to the guarantee. Collecting on a Guarantee and Preventing Payment In the context of construction and procurement agreements, there are two types of bank guarantees—conditional and unconditional. A conditional bank guarantee means that the project owner must satisfy certain agreed-upon conditions (e.g., provision of proof of the breach, proof of damages, or even consent from the contractor) to demand payment. An unconditional bank guarantee means that the bank must compensate the project owner for the demanded amount (up to the limit specified in the bank guarantee) without any conditions. When a project owner concludes that a contractor has breached the underlying contract (often for nonperformance or failure to comply with a representation or warranty), the project owner will demand payment from the bank holding the guarantee. Upon receiving such a demand, Thai banks will usually inform the contractor and ask if it has any objections. Even if the bank guarantee is unconditional, in practice, a bank may be reluctant to make payment if the contractor, as the bank’s customer,
May 9, 2024
As non-cash payments continue to surge in Vietnam, the requirement for strong security standards and a clear legislative framework for intermediary payment services (“IPS”) is becoming more and more critical. Recognizing this, the State Bank of Vietnam (“SBV”) has been working on a draft decree to supersede the outdated Decree No. 101/2012/ND-CP dated November 22, 2012, on non-cash payments (“Draft Non-Cash Payment Decree”), which will lay the groundwork for non-cash payments in general and the provision of IPS in particular. Building upon this, the SBV recently issued a draft circular to replace Circular No. 39/2014/TT-NHNN dated December 11, 2014, on IPS (“Circular 39”) (“Draft IPS Circular”), which will offer more detailed guidance on the provision of IPS in Vietnam on top of the Draft Non-Cash Payment Decree. The Draft IPS Circular will be applicable to (i) IPS providers; (ii) foreign organizations providing IPS in Vietnam; and (iii) organizations and individuals involved in the provision of IPS. Some key updates regarding the Draft IPS Circular are as follows: Scope of Application The Draft IPS Circular sets out further guidance for the provision of IPS as listed under the Draft Non-Cash Payment Decree, including: (i) electronic clearing services; (ii) electronic wallet (“e-wallet”) services; (iii) collection and payment support services; (iv) financial switching services; (v) international financial switching services; and (vi) electronic payment gateway services. Notably, the Draft IPS Circular has explicitly excluded from its scope of application the provision of accounts by goods/service providers to their customers solely for the purpose of payment within the systems of such providers (e.g., cards/coupons or service/transaction accounts of online game service providers, transportation service providers, or securities companies, etc.). Requirements on the Provision of IPS Electronic Clearing Services: The Draft IPS Circular introduces regulations to cover certain elements of electronic clearing services that have