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

December 13, 2021

Bank of Thailand to Update Foreign Exchange Business Regulations

Subscribe to Updates

On November 23, 2021, Thailand’s cabinet approved in principle the amended Ministerial Regulation No. 13 issued under the Exchange Control Act, B.E. 2485 (1942), as amended (ECA).

The ECA is an integral instrument of the Bank of Thailand (BOT) for regulating businesses relating to foreign means of payment (i.e., foreign exchange business) and controlling inward and outward remittances as well as exchange and conversion between Thai baht and foreign currencies. Under the current ECA, no party may purchase, sell, lend, exchange, or transfer foreign currencies except for authorized juristic persons (bank and non-bank entities) or authorized individuals who are licensed by the Ministry of Finance.

The major amendments to Ministerial Regulation No. 13 of the ECA introduce a number of changes to the current regulations for foreign exchange business operations:

  • Expansion of the scope of foreign exchange business
    The scope of a foreign exchange business is currently limited to purchasing, selling, lending, and exchanging foreign currency in the form of banknotes, coins, and travelers’ cheques (i.e., banknotes-to-banknotes conversion only). The new amendments will expand the scope of foreign exchange business to include more foreign currency payment types. For instance, foreign travelers will be able to use credit or debit cards issued by a foreign commercial bank to exchange for cash (i.e., card-to-banknotes conversion).
  • Additional modes of authorizing foreign exchange businesses
    Licensing is currently the only mode of authorization for a foreign exchange business in Thailand. Under the amended regulations, there will be two options for authorization: licensing or registration. While the exact requirements and definition of “registration” will become clearer after the actual amended regulation and any subordinate legislation become available, this indication of an additional mode of authorization may imply varying requirements and burdens in the application process.
  • Allowance of a foreign exchange business license to cover all branches and channels
    A license is currently granted for a fixed location or channel (i.e., one-to-one), which means each additional branch of business operations requires a separate license. Under the amendments, licenses will no longer be tied to a specific location or channel but will cover all locations of business operations (i.e., one-to-many). However, the new registration mode is one-to-one, meaning that every business branch or service channel will have to apply for separate registration.
  • Relaxation of foreign-source income rules
    Current regulations require those who earn income in foreign currencies from foreign sources to either sell the currency to a commercial bank in Thailand or deposit it into a foreign-currency account. The amended regulations allow such foreign currencies to also be used for other transactions, such as payment of trade debts. In addition, it will be possible to use foreign-source income in foreign currencies for transactions (other than selling or depositing) with any authorized juristic person or authorized money exchange operator that has successfully applied for a foreign exchange business license or registration in Thailand.
  • Removal of possibility for individuals to apply for a foreign exchange business license
    Currently, both individuals and juristic persons (e.g., companies) can apply for a license to engage in a foreign exchange business—and as of October 19, 2021, BOT statistics indicated that 114 of the 2,326 authorized foreign money exchange operations in Thailand were individuals. Under the new regulations, however, individuals may no longer apply for a license. Only juristic persons will be able to apply for a license to engage in the foreign exchange business. Individuals who are currently holding a license will be allowed to continue their business operation for up to three years from the effective date of the amended ECA; beyond that they will no longer be allowed foreign exchange business operations in Thailand.
  • New possible disqualification for directors, management, and majority shareholders
    Under the current rules, individuals are disqualified from serving as directors, managers, and major shareholders of a license holder by bankruptcy, imprisonment for a foreign exchange violation, or a sentence for a money-laundering or counter-terrorist financing crime. The amended regulations add another offense to the list of possible disqualifications: conducting a foreign exchange business without a valid license or registration.

The expected modernizing effects of this draft amendment on the regulatory regime for foreign exchange businesses come in response to the fast development of the fintech industry and emerging innovative means of payment. The draft also adopts more stringent requirements and international standards in order to achieve good governance.

Following the cabinet approval, the draft amendment to Ministerial Regulation No. 13 under the ECA will undergo consideration by the Council of State, after which it will take effect. This process will likely be completed in the coming months.

For guidance on any aspect of exchange control or foreign investment regulations in Thailand, please contact Kobkit Thienpreecha at [email protected] or +66 2056 5534, Nutavit Sirikan at [email protected] or +66 2056 5510, or Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected] or +66 2056 5561.

Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Capital Markets

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 24, 2025
On October 22, 2025, the Thai government posted a directive not to grant gambling licenses for gambling involving poker nationwide to crack down on illegal gambling activities. The directive was issued by Thailand’s Ministry of Interior to align with government policies to prevent the legalization of all types of gambling businesses, including poker as a sporting activity. This will result in the revocation of poker activities as sport and institute a strict ban on such activities nationwide. Businesses should note the new government’s strict approach toward gambling activities as the legal situation regarding gambling in the country continues to draw close attention.
Read More
October 1, 2025
In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage. Key Legal Risks The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment. In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment. Director and Executive Qualifications Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in
Read More
September 30, 2025
Vietnam’s higher education system is at a pivotal stage of reform, with the government taking decisive steps to strengthen its policy and regulatory framework. In response to obstacles encountered during the implementation of the Law on Higher Education, issued in 2012 and amended in 2018, the third draft of the amended Law on Higher Education (Draft Law) is scheduled for submission to the National Assembly in October 2025. The Draft Law reflects the state’s commitment to aligning the education sector with international standards while addressing persistent structural challenges. The Draft Law emphasizes clarifying institutional mandates, enhancing accountability, and modernizing governance models to enable higher education institutions to operate with greater autonomy and efficiency. Against this backdrop, we outline below several notable provisions of the third draft and their potential implications for higher education institutions (HEIs) in Vietnam. Applicable Entities In addition to HEIs as defined and covered under existing legislation, the Draft Law extends its scope of applicable entities. The current Law on Higher Education does not regulate training institutions under state agencies, the armed forces, or political and social organizations, nor does it provide specific provisions for institutions offering only postgraduate education. To address this, the Draft Law introduces the term “institutions with higher education activities,” expanding its scope to include: (a) academies and research institutes established by the prime minister, mandated to provide doctoral-level training; (b) educational institutions affiliated with state agencies, political organizations, socio-political organizations, and the people’s armed forces, authorized to offer higher education programs in their specialized fields; and (c) institutions established pursuant to international treaties or by decision of the prime minister, with authorization to deliver certain levels of higher education. The inclusion of “institutions with higher education activities” represents a significant development both legally and institutionally. In an increasingly diversified higher education
Read More
September 29, 2025
In September 2019, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 75/2019/ND-CP on Administrative Sanctions in the Field of Competition (Decree 75) to address the urgent need for clear sanctioning mechanisms following the implementation of the new Law on Competition in July 2019. However, after five years of enforcement, various gaps and inconsistencies have been exposed that hinder its application. These shortcomings have reduced the deterrent effect of the sanctioning regime, and created legal uncertainty for market participants. A recent case involving Duc Giang – Lao Cai Chemicals’ acquisition of another chemical company—one of the first cases of economic concentration violation to be sanctioned by the National Competition Commission (NCC) since the Law on Competition took effect—highlights the practical difficulties under Vietnam’s competition law enforcement regime. In this case, although the transaction exceeded the statutory notification thresholds of economic concentration set out in the law, the parties failed to submit the required notification. This violation resulted in the NCC imposing aggregate fines of VND 1,423,982,880 (approximately USD 54,770) on the companies in September 2024. On appeal, Duc Giang – Lao Cai Chemicals argued that the chairman of the NCC was legally entitled to issue a warning as the key punishment instead of a monetary penalty. However, the chairman rejected the appeal, citing Article 14 of Decree 75, under which the specific penalty and level for “failure to notify economic concentration” is a fine, not a warning. While the chairman of the NCC is generally empowered to impose penalties, a warning cannot be applied if the specific regulation for a particular violation does not provide for it as a sanction. This example shows the inadequacy and inconsistency of the regulations on penalties for violations of competition law, and underscores the need for an amendment of Decree 75 to resolve such conflicts
Read More