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 11, 2021

BOI Extends Privileges to the Lending of Funds to Related Companies

Subscribe to Updates

On September 16, 2021, Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) published BOI Notification No. Sor. 3/2564, extending the scope of certain promoted activities to include lending money to related companies in Thailand and overseas.

The new notification brings these activities within the scope of “trade and investment support offices” (TISOs) and “international business centers” (IBCs)—two of the most popular categories of promoted activity under the BOI. Foreign-majority owned companies may now apply for either TISO or IBC promotion to cover lending funds to affiliates as an alternative to applying for a foreign business license, which can be less predictable. BOI-promoted companies that already have a BOI certificate in the TISO or IBC categories can amend the BOI certificate to cover this kind of lending activity.

The amended scope of the promoted activities for both TISO and IBC categories now provides more flexibility for BOI-promoted companies to provide financial services to their affiliates. Previously this was restricted—especially when foreign-majority-owned companies wished to lend money offshore.

Conditions

Under the new notification, promoted business activities under the TISO category now include lending to “affiliated and group companies,” while those under the IBC category now include lending to “associated enterprises.” These terms are defined separately in Thai laws and regulations, but in practice the definitions are very similar and generally refer to companies that share structural connections. Companies must check carefully to make sure that their proposed structure falls within the appropriate legal definition before applying to the BOI for investment promotion.

Lending business activities now permitted under the IBC and TISO categories include loans in foreign currencies to associated enterprises and affiliated and group companies located overseas, and loans in Thai baht to associated enterprises and affiliated group companies in Thailand. The new BOI notification also allows loans in Thai baht to associated enterprises and affiliated and group companies in Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Vietnam for trading or business investment purposes in those countries or in Thailand.

A promoted company cannot conduct lending business exclusively, but must conduct at least one other TISO business activity or IBC business activity (excluding treasury center and international trade business activities), depending on the category of the promoted company. The scope of the lending business must not fall under the scope of a treasury center business as defined by the BOI and the Bank of Thailand (BOT). Moreover, offshore lending must still comply with BOT exchange requirements.

The two categories differ in terms of tax incentives—no tax incentives are available for TISO lending activities, while tax incentives for IBC projects depend predominantly on the criteria for the special tax incentives scheme as laid out by the Revenue Department (RD), which has not yet recognized lending as an IBC business activity under its own IBC tax scheme. While the full impact of this is still unclear, it could mean that revenue from a promoted lending business might not be eligible for tax incentives under the RD’s IBC tax scheme.

Foreign-majority owned entities in Thailand may not engage in any financial service business activity, except for exempted money lending to affiliated and group companies in Thailand as prescribed by the relevant ministerial regulation issued under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999), unless they are granted either a foreign business license or a foreign business certificate for this purpose. The chances of obtaining either of these are low.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 20, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation No. 142/2025/QH15, passed by the National Assembly on December 11, 2025, does something many regional counterparts do not yet attempt: it instructs parties and arbitral tribunals on exactly what happens to an arbitration once a debtor becomes insolvent. Together with the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12, the new law improves upon what used to be an uncertain area of practice, now providing an explicit, mandatory sequence of procedures. Suspension and Termination of Arbitration Proceedings Under article 40(2) of the law, once a Vietnamese court accepts a bankruptcy petition, any arbitration that concerns the debtor’s financial obligations must be temporarily suspended as soon as the tribunal receives the court’s notification. If the court subsequently issues a decision commencing bankruptcy proceedings, article 59(2) takes a further step: the suspended arbitration is terminated outright, and the underlying case file is transferred to the court handling the insolvency for resolution. The two provisions work as a sequence: first suspension, then termination and transfer, rather than as independent triggers. Meanwhile, article 60(4) reinforces this effect by vesting the bankruptcy court with exclusive jurisdiction over all claims against the debtor from the date the petition is accepted. Notably, this mechanism operates automatically, without the need for the insolvency court to issue a separate anti-arbitration order. The tribunal simply suspends or terminates the proceeding by operation of law once notified; however, Vietnamese law currently provides no procedure by which a party can apply to the insolvency court for permission to continue the arbitration despite the statutory effect. Practitioners with a Vietnamese counterparty in arbitration should treat notification of a bankruptcy filing as something to flag to the tribunal immediately since continuing to arbitrate a claim that has become subject to article 40(2) or 59(2) risks producing an award vulnerable
Read More
August 20, 2026
Thai law contains no provision that speaks directly to what happens to an arbitration when one of the parties becomes insolvent. The interaction between arbitration and insolvency is derived instead from the general operation of two separately drafted laws: the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) and the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002). Because Thai courts have had few opportunities to interpret how these two statutes apply together, the practical answer to many questions, such as who represents an insolvent party in arbitration, whether an award will be enforced, and what happens to a foreign proceeding, depends on inference from general principles of insolvency, arbitration, and procedural law rather than on settled rules. Liquidation and Restructuring The Bankruptcy Act governs both liquidation, which winds up a debtor’s affairs, and restructuring (rehabilitation), which aims to preserve a business. The consequences for arbitration differ accordingly. In liquidation, the debtor’s assets vest in the official receiver, who alone can conduct or continue any arbitration affecting the estate; the debtor loses the authority to act on its own behalf. In restructuring, the plan preparer or administrator takes over that role, but there is more room for the debtor to remain involved, since the objective of rehabilitation is to keep the business operational. Restructuring carries an automatic stay that takes effect once the Bankruptcy Court accepts the restructuring petition. This stay can halt an arbitration regardless of where it is seated. In contrast, liquidation does not work through a stay; instead, the debtor’s loss of authority over its own assets and disputes is what constrains the arbitration. Neither proceeding provides a party a formal route to apply for permission to continue arbitrating—the Bankruptcy Act contains no such mechanism—though in restructuring cases the Bankruptcy Court may allow proceedings to continue where doing so will not prejudice
Read More
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More
August 18, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) is seeking public comment on proposed amendments that would significantly expand know-your-customer (KYC) and customer due diligence (CDD) requirements for cash-related transactions at financial institutions (FIs) and specialized financial institutions (SFIs). Released on August 5, 2026, the proposed regulation would supersede BOT Notification No. 16/2569, which focused primarily on cash withdrawal transactions. The public comment period is open through September 3, 2026. The amendments reflect concerns that FIs and SFIs may be used to facilitate the movement, concealment, and conversion of criminal proceeds, potentially damaging institutional operations and public confidence in the financial system. Expanded Scope of Covered Transactions The most significant change is the broadening of the definition of “cash-related transactions.” Previously, the regulation covered only cash withdrawals and uncrossed check withdrawals. The amended regulation extends coverage to include: Cash deposits, check deposits, or receipt of funds from the public not in the form of deposit accounts; Thai baht (THB) banknote exchange (different denominations); Receipt of cash for issuing checks and drafts; and Purchase, sale, or exchange of foreign banknotes. Mandatory Identity Verification and Risk Management For all cash-related transactions, FIs and SFIs must require customers, or authorized or delegated persons, to present identification or verify their identity before every transaction, including one-time (walk-in) transactions. Specific identification requirements vary by transaction type, customer nationality, and channel (branch vs. electronic). FIs and SFIs must also establish comprehensive risk management processes and procedures for cash-related transactions. These requirements include identifying customers or authorized representatives in accordance with transaction-specific verification standards, analyzing customer behavior, implementing risk-management measures proportionate to the customer’s risk profile, and recording abnormal behavior in relevant systems. The BOT also encourages institutions to proactively guide customers toward transaction channels that offer greater traceability than cash. For corporate customers in high-risk business sectors—including foreign
Read More