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

April 9, 2020

Bank of Thailand Issues Relief Measures for Debtors Affected by COVID-19 Pandemic

Subscribe to Updates

The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has issued BOT Announcement No. Wor 277/2563, dated February 28, 2020, to provide relief measures for small and medium-sized debtors who suffer adverse economic effects from the COVID-19 pandemic. The key points of this announcement are summarized below.

Revised Definition of Debt Restructuring

Under this announcement, “debt restructuring” means restructuring of debt arising from a debtor’s increased credit risks, which can be divided into two categories:

  1. Debt restructuring for loans that are not yet classified as Non-Performing Loans (NPLs). This type of debt restructuring is preemptive, and will commence once the debtor starts demonstrating issues with debt repayment. The debtors are not yet classified as NPL, but have Net Present Value (NPV) loss; and,
  2. Debt restructuring for NPLs deemed to be Troubled Debt Restructuring (TDR), regardless of whether there is NPV loss.

Guidelines for Relief Measures for Debtors from January 1, 2020, until December 31, 2021

Financial support

The BOT has requested cooperation from Specialized Financial Institutions (SFIs) (i.e., state-owned financial institutions established and defined under specific laws, such as the Government Savings Bank, Export-Import Bank of Thailand, and Small and Medium Enterprise Development Bank of Thailand) to provide preemptive financial support to debtors who face direct and indirect adverse impact from the outbreak (e.g., providing additional working capital, loan moratoria, packing credit or trust receipts, renewal of credit limits, and cutting interest rates).

Scope of debtors entitled to the relief measures

The debtors entitled to the relief measures under this announcement must have potential to continue business operations or repay debt in the future, and must be:

  • Debtors whose debt has been classified as Non-NPL (classified as normal or Special Mention) since January 1, 2020;
  • Debtors whose debt became an NPL on or after January 1, 2019, except where the SFI can prove that a debtor whose debt became an NPL before January 1, 2019, is an NPL debtor adversely affected by the economic loss.

SFI Requirements

SFIs which provide relief measures to debtors that meet the above criteria must comply with the following measures.

  • Formulation of policy for relief measures. SFIs must formulate a clear policy for the provision of relief measures and criteria for considering debtors who are adversely affected by the COVID-19 outbreak.
  • Classification of debtors. SFIs can immediately classify Non-NPL debtors (normal debtors or Special Mention debtors) as normal debtors, provided that the result of the SFI’s analysis shows that the debtors can perform obligations under a debt restructuring agreement. This kind of debt restructuring will also be deemed preemptive, and will not be deemed as TDR.
  • Working capital. The SFIs can classify the provision of additional working capital to debtors to facilitate their business operations during debt restructuring, provided that the debtors have sufficient cash flow for repayment or have repayment capability when taking other factors into consideration.
  • Reserve requirements. SFIs are required to comply with BOT notifications regarding reserve requirements for SFIs.
  • Relevant personnel for debt restructuring. If an SFI has insufficient personnel for debt restructuring, the BOT temporarily allows loan officers to perform work related to debt restructuring, provided that the SFI has put in place policies for checks and balances.
  • Reducing minimum amount due on credit cards. SFIs can consider reducing the minimum amount due on credit cards, for debtors who are adversely affected by the COVID-19 outbreak, below 10% of the outstanding amount.
  • Report to the BOT. SFIs are required to submit reports to the BOT detailing target loans and outstanding debts of the debtors who are subject to these measures.
  • Communication. The SFIs are required to internally communicate relief measures both within the organization and externally to debtors.

These measures should provide strong relief for small to medium sized debtors that are suddenly facing financial difficulties as a result of the unexpected disruption caused by the COVID-19 outbreak. In addition, the BOT is expected to provide additional measures if and when the situation escalates.

Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Corporate/M&A

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 29, 2026
Thailand’s cabinet has approved the draft Act on Liability for Defective Goods, commonly called Thailand’s “Lemon Law.” The Draft Act is currently pending consideration by Parliament. The draft law aims to strengthen buyers’ position in pursuing cases against sellers. While the Civil and Commercial Code offers provisions governing liability for defective goods, it is difficult in practice for buyers to successfully make a claim against sellers, particularly where defects are latent and not discoverable at the time of sale or delivery. By introducing product-specific rules and clearer remedies, the new law is intended to modernize Thailand’s consumer protection framework and align it more closely with international standards, and to help relieve the buyer’s burden of proof against the seller in product liability cases. If enacted, the draft act will take effect 180 days after publication in the Government Gazette, giving businesses a transition period to assess their compliance obligations. This article provides an overview of the key provisions of the draft act and highlights some practical considerations for businesses operating in Thailand. Scope and Key Definitions The draft act applies to sellers—defined as persons who sell goods in the ordinary course of business—and protects buyers, a term defined broadly to include not just the original purchaser but also transferees and successors in title. This expands the class of people who can bring claims. The law does not apply to used goods, live animals, or goods exempted by future ministerial regulation. It also leaves intact any separate warranties, promises, advertisements, or other guarantees a seller has given; those remain enforceable alongside the new statutory rights. General Liability for Defective Goods Sellers are liable for defects that exist at the time of delivery, regardless of whether the seller knew about them. Liability arises where a defect reduces: The benefit intended under
Read More
June 23, 2026
Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) has significantly revised its post-approval compliance framework for projects that receive investment promotion incentives, replacing the previous semiannual reporting system for project progress with a new quarterly reporting regime. The initial report is due by July 30, 2026, covering the second-quarter reporting period of April to June 2026. The new requirements—implemented through BOI Announcement No. 8/2569 and Office of the BOI Notification No. Por. 8/2569, both of which became effective on March 30, 2026—apply both to newly promoted projects and to existing promoted projects that remain in the implementation stage. Background Under the previous reporting framework, BOI-promoted companies that had not yet commenced full operations were generally required to submit reports on project progress to the BOI twice a year (February and July) through the BOI’s e-Monitoring system. By adopting a quarterly reporting regime, the BOI seeks to strengthen monitoring and evaluation of investment progress and project implementation. Reporting Requirements Under the new regulations, BOI-promoted companies must submit project progress reports on a quarterly basis during the implementation phase of a promoted project. The reporting periods and submission deadlines are: Q1 (January–March): April 30 Q2 (April–June): July 30 Q3 (July–September): October 30 Q4 (October–December): January 30 of the following year The quarterly reporting obligation runs from the date the BOI promotion certificate is issued until the BOI grants approval for commencement of full operations. For newly promoted projects, no quarterly report is required for the quarter in which the BOI promotion certificate is issued—the first reporting obligation arises in the immediately following reporting period. All project progress reports must be submitted electronically through the BOI’s e-Monitoring system. The existing annual reporting requirement also remains in effect, requiring promoted companies to submit an annual operating results report through the e-Monitoring system by July 31 of
Read More
June 23, 2026
On May 14, 2026, Thailand published a ministerial regulation in the Government Gazette to prescribe measures for prevention and suppression of technology crimes. The regulation creates a comprehensive procedural framework for returning money and digital assets to victims of technology crimes. It will take effect 90 days after publication (in mid-August 2026), giving affected entities a limited window to prepare. Mandatory Reporting Obligations for Financial Institutions When a deposit account, e-money account, or digital asset wallet is frozen in connection with a technology crime, the relevant financial institution or business operator must report transaction data to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) via AMLO’s designated electronic system. Required data elements include account numbers (sender and receiver), names, identification or passport numbers, legal entity registration numbers, phone numbers, remaining balance, damage amount, transaction reference numbers, and the bank case ID. Institutions that already share data through the information-sharing system under the emergency decree are deemed to have satisfied this reporting obligation, creating an incentive for platform participation. When the Royal Thai Police or the Department of Special Investigation seize or freeze assets related to technology crimes, they must provide AMLO with investigation reports, complaint evidence, money-trail data, and account statements. Notification and Claims Process Once the AMLO secretary-general approves verified reports of a technology crime, the account information of persons connected to the crime will be published in the Government Gazette, triggering a 90-day window for victims to file claims and for related persons to file objections. Officers will also publish details on AMLO’s electronic media and send registered mail to identified victims, which will be deemed received after 7 days domestically or 15 days internationally. Victims have 90 days from the date the crime is published in the Government Gazette to file claims through AMLO’s electronic system. Claims must include
Read More
June 22, 2026
Arbitrator independence and impartiality form the cornerstone of a legitimate arbitral process. Under section 19 of the Thai Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), prospective arbitrators must disclose circumstances likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality or independence, and existing arbitrators must do so throughout proceedings. This mirrors article 12 of the UNCITRAL Model Law. Yet despite this clear mandate, practical implementation varies significantly across Thailand’s arbitration landscape. Background Thailand’s two principal arbitration institutions, the Thai Arbitration Institute (TAI) and the Thailand Arbitration Center (THAC), both maintain procedures for addressing arbitrator challenges and require compliance with the statutory disclosure obligation. Under both sets of rules, any party wishing to challenge an arbitrator must submit a challenge application within fifteen days of becoming aware of the relevant facts, and a committee is appointed to consider the matter on a case-by-case basis. The TAI additionally prescribes its Code of Ethics and Conduct for Arbitrators to further emphasize the expectation of impartiality and transparency. However, Thailand’s arbitration ecosystem extends well beyond the TAI and THAC. Several sector-specific institutions also administer arbitral proceedings, including the Thai Commercial Arbitration Office under the Board of Trade of Thailand, the Arbitration Centre of the Office of the Insurance Commission, the Arbitration Centre of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Office for the Prevention and Resolution of Disputes regarding Intellectual Property, and the Arbitration Centre of the Thai General Insurance Association. These institutions each operate under their own procedural rules, which were developed to serve particular industries and dispute profiles. The procedural mechanisms for securing and documenting an independence declaration are not uniformly established across these forums. Consequences of Procedural Inconsistency This creates a notable gap. Not all arbitration bodies have a formalized procedure requiring written independence statements before proceedings commence. Some tribunals proceed
Read More