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

November 25, 2011

Banking in Thailand: Resident or Non-resident Account?

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

As a foreigner in Thailand, you may wish to open a bank account in the country to accommodate your financial needs or investment portfolios. You may therefore wonder whether you can open a bank account in Thailand and what types of accounts are available to you.

There are two main types of bank accounts offered to foreigners, depending on their resident status in Thailand: a resident bank account and a non-resident bank account. This article will touch on the main differences between these account types and some other relevant conditions.

A resident bank account is, in theory, one owned by a person residing in Thailand for regular use within Thailand, while a non-resident bank account refers to one owned by a person having no presence or residence in Thailand. For the purpose of a resident bank account, Thai residence can be proved by a permanent residence permit or a valid work permit in Thailand.

In principle, a foreigner who has no proof of residence in Thailand can only open a non-resident bank account; however, some Thai-based banks may, depending on their internal policy and discretion, accommodate requests from non-resident customers in opening a resident account with no proof of residence. Multinational banks tend to be stricter in selecting and screening customers, and most do not allow foreigners to open a resident bank account without proof of residence in Thailand; they allow only a non-resident bank account.

Resident bank accounts and non-resident bank accounts are quite similar in terms of transferring foreign currency from abroad into the bank account for spending in Thailand. The owner of a bank account in Thailand has the duty to file a Foreign Exchange Transaction Form (FET Form) if the amount of remittance is greater than US$50,000 or its equivalent in another currency. This FET Form is the primary evidence of inward remittance of funds into Thailand, and it should clearly and precisely specify the purpose of the funds transfer as well as the details of the funds owner. In certain situations (eg, repayment of a loan or return of investment), the FET Form could be an important document for transferring funds back out of Thailand. In case the inward remittance is less than US$50,000 (or its equivalent in other currency), a statement or letter recording the transfer should be requested from the commercial bank and kept for future reference when transferring funds abroad.

Resident and non-resident bank accounts differ mainly in respect of remitting funds out of Thailand. This is because a resident bank account is considered an account within Thailand, while a non-resident bank account is treated in a manner similar to an offshore account. The transfer of funds into a non-resident bank account is more or less comparable to the transfer to a bank account in a foreign country. Any person in Thailand who wishes to transfer money into a non-resident account has to provide the necessary documents (relevant contracts or invoices) and prove the legitimate obligation and source of funds; however, there are fewer restrictions and reporting requirements in remittance of funds from a non-resident account abroad.

On the other hand, there is no reporting requirement for a transfer of money into or out of a resident account if the transaction occurs within Thailand, but it will be controlled by the Bank of Thailand in the event of remittance from a resident bank account abroad. For every single baht that needs to be remitted from a resident bank account to a foreign country, there must be appropriate supporting documents (relevant contracts or invoices) to prove the legitimate obligation, source of the money and purpose of the transfer, which an account owner is obliged to maintain.

In case a non-resident foreigner decides to open a bank account in Thailand to receive money from products sold into Thailand, a non-resident bank account will allow more flexibility when transferring such money abroad; however, any person in Thailand who deposits money into the non-resident bank account has to provide supporting documents to prove a legitimate obligation of payment for each deposit made.

Of course, this reporting requirement could cause inconvenience if deposits need to be made often. But in this regard a resident bank account would help facilitate local purchasers to transfer the selling price into the bank account, without requiring submission of any supporting documents to prove the legitimate obligation and the purpose of the transfer.

A non-resident foreigner, however, has to keep all records of money transferred in and out of such a resident bank account for the purpose of transferring money in the account abroad in the future. Otherwise, the money will need to be transferred out of Thailand via another arrangement.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 19, 2025
On January 1, 2025, the Department of Business Development (DBD) in Thailand’s Ministry of Commerce implemented new stringent corporate registration screening measures in collaboration with several other government agencies to prevent entities from opening corporate mule accounts to commit criminal activities in Thailand. The DBD’s Order of the Office of Central Company and Partnership Registration No. 3/2024 stipulates a new method for registering the establishment of partnerships and limited companies for people who have been involved in underlying crimes or who are owners of bank accounts that are being used for underlying crime, as per the notification of the Anti-Online Scam Operation Center (AOC) to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) and the collated AMLO list of such persons. The order establishes the following key requirements: Managing partners and directors of partnerships and limited companies, respectively, whose names have been listed by the AMLO as a person who is involved in an underlying offense, or as the owner of a bank account being used for the underlying offense, must appear before the registrar in person. The concerned persons cited on the AMLO list must provide valid documentation of their identity to the DBD registrar (e.g., national identification card, government official identification card, government or state enterprise employee identification card, alien identification card, passport, document used in lieu of a travel document, or other similar documents with photo identification). This collaboration between the DBD and various relevant government agencies aims to eradicate the problem of fraudsters using mule accounts set up under legally established entities to deceive the public. It also seeks to enhance checks and screening of corporate mule accounts that are used to carry out criminal activities such as money laundering or cybercrime. These actions are part of the Thai government’s broader policy to suppress economic crimes. For more
March 14, 2025
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has published the Draft Guidelines for Digital Fraud Management, which aim to help financial service providers tackle digital fraud and ensure safety and trust in the Thai financial system. These draft guidelines, which are available for public comment until March 18, 2025, provide a comprehensive framework for financial service providers, covering prevention, detection, management, and resolution of digital fraud, as well as support for customers affected by fraud. The BOT tentatively plans to implement these draft guidelines on April 1, 2025, along with circular letters on the minimum required measures for tackling “mule accounts” (deposit or e-money accounts used as tools to receive and transfer funds obtained through the commission of any offense) and measures to strengthen Thailand’s customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence procedures. Under the draft guidelines, “financial service providers” include financial institutions and special financial institutions under the Financial Institution Business Act and payment providers under the Payment Systems Act. Commercial banks, special financial institutions, and operators of transferable e-money services must adhere to every requirement in the draft guidelines. Other financial service providers (e.g., payment providers other than operators of transferable e-money services) can implement the draft guidelines as deemed appropriate to their services, products, and service channels. Digital Fraud Management Requirements The draft guidelines establish the following key requirements: Policy and oversight. Directors and senior executives of financial service providers must set and adopt appropriate “end-to-end” fraud management policies and KPIs to manage digital fraud, covering prevention, monitoring, detection, management, resolution, and support for affected customers. Fraud management processes. Financial service providers must establish a clear framework for managing digital fraud throughout the customer lifecycle, from customer onboarding to service termination, according to industry standards at a minimum and covering at least the following processes: Know your customer
March 6, 2025
On February 18, 2025, the Thai Senate approved an amendment to the Act on the Establishment of and Procedures for the Tax Court. This follows the July 2024 approval by the Thai cabinet and subsequent preparation of supporting secondary legislation. This important amendment to procedural law, once it takes effect, will extend the exclusive jurisdictional powers of the Tax Court to all criminal tax, customs, and excise tax claims in addition to the court’s existing jurisdiction over all such civil claims. The amendment, while now formally approved by the legislature, is awaiting the king’s signature and will take effect 180 days after its publication in the Government Gazette. Based upon its projected publication date, the amendment will likely take effect by the end of the third quarter of this year. This development is set to offer a more sophisticated Tax Court litigation process for highly specialized and often complex criminal tax and customs claims, something with which Thailand’s traditional criminal courts have struggled. It also ensures that all tax and customs matters are adjudicated before the same court, saving time, party costs, and judicial resources. This appears likely to result in more consistent adjudication of criminal tax and customs disputes, a benefit for the Thai government and party litigants alike. Any ongoing criminal tax and customs claims already commenced with the respective criminal courts on the date on which the amendment becomes effective will remain under the exclusive jurisdiction of those criminal courts. The Tax Court will have exclusive jurisdiction over all other claims. This important legislative change offers those managing or otherwise facing civil and/or criminal Thai tax or customs disputes the opportunity to more effectively plan and execute a uniform defense strategy before a single, qualified forum.
February 26, 2025
Thailand ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on December 21, 1959, with the Convention coming into force on March 20, 1960. This ratification was a significant step in aligning Thailand’s arbitration framework with international standards, facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the country. In Thailand, the enforcement of both domestic and international arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), which is based on the first version of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (as opposed to the latest version from 2006). However, unlike Australia, Hong Kong, and Singapore, Thailand is not an UNCITRAL Model Law country. While Thailand’s Arbitration Act is influenced by the UNCITRAL Model Law, it incorporates certain local contexts that require interpretation alongside Thai court rulings. The Arbitration Act also confirms the authority of arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures, reinforcing tribunals’ power in managing disputes effectively. Additionally, the act incorporates principles from the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). This article explores the key procedural steps, timeframes, and practical challenges associated with the enforcement of arbitral awards under Thailand’s legal framework. Procedures for Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Thailand The enforcement of arbitral awards in Thailand follows the procedures outlined in the Arbitration Act: Application to the competent court: Under the Arbitration Act, parties seeking enforcement must submit a petition to the Thai courts within three years of the award having become enforceable. The application must include the original or certified copies of the arbitral award and the arbitration agreement, along with translations if necessary. In Thailand, the choice of court for filing the arbitral award depends on the nature of the disputed contract. If the contract concerns