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 6, 2012

Critical Considerations for Foreign Investors Doing Business in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Increasingly investors are expanding their businesses to developing countries with a view to reducing costs and selling products in new markets. Thailand is among the most attractive destinations for them. However, before a commitment is made to a foreign country, the investor needs to study not only the economic and political stability of the country but, more importantly, the local laws and regulations applicable to foreign investors.

The Thai government has announced many incentives to encourage foreign investors to choose Thailand. Investors should consult counsel well versed in local regulations so that they properly establish themselves in the country.

There are various types of business structures available to the foreign investor. This article will focus on for-profit subsidiaries.

Foreigners may set up a wholly owned subsidiary to conduct business in Thailand if the business activity is not reserved for Thais under the Foreign Business Act (FBA) or other local laws. From time to time, we find foreign companies incorporated in Thailand that have unknowingly or unintentionally violated foreign ownership restrictions by engaging in businesses reserved under the FBA.

Under the Act, a company is considered foreign if half, or more than half, of its shares are held by a non-Thai natural or juristic persons.

If you operate a foreign company, you must carefully consider whether the business activities in which your company engages are reserved under the FBA. You need to be aware that this applies to both core and non-core business activities.

Businesses reserved for Thais under the FBA are divided into three lists. Foreigners are strictly prohibited from engaging in business activities on List 1 of the FBA, while foreigners wishing to engage in activities on List 2 of the FBA must obtain a Foreign Business License (FBL), which requires cabinet approval. Foreigners that wish to engage in activities on List 3 of the FBA must obtain an FBL from the Foreign Business Committee.

Manufacturing activities are mostly liberalized and foreigners are allowed to make and sell products in Thailand. Foreigners, however, are not allowed to buy products from other suppliers and retail or wholesale the products domestically. Nevertheless, they are allowed to export those products.

There is a catch-all under List 3. All service businesses are reserved, and installation, repair, maintenance, after-sale services, leasing, and lending are all considered service businesses. Foreigners are strictly prohibited from engaging in these activities.

Even the provision of a loan to a subsidiary or to an affiliated company is deemed to be a service business and is restricted under the FBA.

We have found that many foreign companies mistakenly believe that if they register a Memorandum of Association with broad business objectives with the Ministry of Commerce that they are legally permitted to engage in any business without an FBL or a Foreign Business Certificate. This is a common misconception.

The ministry allows companies, both Thai and foreign, to register objectives that are as broad as they wish. Companies need not conduct all business objectives registered with the ministry; they can conduct only one or a few.

However, companies are not allowed to engage in objectives not registered in their Memorandum of Association. If a company wishes to conduct business not listed in its objectives, it must amend its memorandum—this is generally the reason companies register broad objectives.

If you plan to operate a foreign-owned company, carefully review your proposed activities. A foreigner who operates a business reserved under the FBA, without the required FBL, with or without intent, will be charged with a violation of the FBA. The punishment is imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, a fine of 100,000 to 1 million baht, or both. The court will also order the termination or dissolution of the business.

We encourage foreigners to comply with Thai laws and apply for an FBL if they wish to engage in businesses reserved under the FBA, or to seek approval from other competent authorities, such as the Board of Investment of Thailand or the Industrial Estate Authority of Thailand. Both are empowered to grant fiscal and non-fiscal benefits to qualified projects.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals
Piyanuj (Lui) Ratprasatporn
Partner and Director, Corporate & Commercial
Thailand
+66 2056 5555
Email

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 31, 2025
On September 29, 2025, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC Office) published its Regulations on the Review and Certification of Binding Corporate Rules B.E. 2568 (2025) (the Regulations). The Regulations provide clarity on the PDPC Office’s approach to reviewing and certifying binding corporate rules (BCRs) under Section 29 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), and aim to facilitate international data transfers within a group of undertakings or enterprises (a “corporate group”). In conjunction with this development, the PDPC Office also approved BCRs for two companies operating in Thailand on September 30, 2025. This milestone represents the first concrete progress since the PDPC’s Notification on Criteria for the Protection of Personal Data Sent or Transferred to a Foreign Country pursuant to Section 29 of the PDPA B.E. 2566 (2023) came into effect in March 2024. Some key features of the Regulations are set out below. Categorization of BCRs BCRs are classified into two types: (1) BCRs for Controllers (BCR-C) and (2) BCRs for Processors (BCR-P). The category must be clearly specified when submitting the BCRs to the PDPC Office. Documentation Requirement The applicant must prepare and submit the application (a standard template may be provided by the PDPC Office in the future) along with supporting documents for review and certification in the Thai language. If the supporting documents are in a foreign language, a certified Thai translation should be provided. The translation must be notarized by a notary public or qualified person. Supporting documents may include, among others, a binding instrument such as an intra-group agreement, or a list of entities subject to the BCRs. Expedited Process Requirement Organizations with existing BCR approvals under the EU or UK GDPR, or from countries announced by the PDPC under Section 28, may apply through an
Read More
October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
Read More
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