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

March 28, 2024

Developments in Thailand’s Draft Climate Change Law

Subscribe to Updates

On February 14, 2024, Thailand’s Department of Climate Change and Energy (DCCE) began holding public hearings on the draft Climate Change Act, which is being developed to help the country achieve its commitments under the Paris Agreement. These hearings, held throughout the country, are expected to be completed by the end of March 2024.

Key features and developments of the draft Climate Change Act are outlined below.

Supervising Authority

Under the current draft, the main supervising authority is changed from the Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning to the DCCE.

The DCCE will focus on fostering collaboration with national and international governmental committees, agencies, and private sector organizations to facilitate the implementation of activities in alignment with the Climate Change Act.

Thailand’s Climate Change Master Plan

To be issued by the National Climate Change Policy Committee (NCCPC), the Climate Change Master Plan will serve as a national-level plan and framework for Thailand’s actions on climate change adaptation. The DCCE will review the plan every five years and is in charge of monitoring and enhancing state agencies’ implementation of the master plan.

GHG Database

The DCCE will establish and maintain a national greenhouse gas (GHG) database to track the quantity of GHG emissions from human activities, sequestration, and reduction efforts. In this regard, eight state agencies and other agencies to be prescribed by the NCCPC are required to store GHG-related information and submit reports to the DCCE.

If necessary, certain private entities (e.g., factory operators and energy companies) may be required to report activity data to government agencies for compiling the GHG database.

GHG Reporting

For the benefit of the emissions trading system, legal entities under private and public laws prescribed by the NCCPC are required to submit an annual report of the quantity of emissions or sequestration of GHG resulting from their operations within three months from the end of each calendar year. The report must be certified by the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization before being submitted to the DCCE. Reporting entities must keep their reports, records, and other relevant documents for at least seven years from the date of their submission.

Emissions Trading System

The draft Climate Change Act implements an emissions trading system (ETS), in regard to which the DCCE is responsible for developing and revising allocation plans and preparing reports summarizing plan implementation outcomes. The DCCE is also responsible for allocating allowances and emissions trading rights to prescribed controlled entities according to the specified criteria, duration, and methods, which must comply with the allocation plan.

Carbon Credits and Taxes

The draft Climate Change Act outlines carbon credit qualifications, licensing requirements for carbon credit businesses, carbon credit certification services, carbon credit trading centers, and other businesses related to carbon credits.

It also establishes a carbon tax system to levy taxes on goods based on the assessed amount of GHG at specific points in the product life cycle. This aims to encourage reduction of cross-border GHG leakage.

For more information on Thailand’s draft Climate Change Act, or on any aspect of energy, industrial, or other climate-related policies, please contact Kobkit Thienpreecha at [email protected], Witchupong Chittchang at [email protected], Rada Lamsam at [email protected], or Nathat Chongcharoenphanich at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 7, 2026
On September 4, 2026, Thailand’s prime minister convened the first meeting of the Data Center Business Policy Committee. The committee endorsed a draft policy framework for the data center industry and tasked four subcommittees with developing the standards that would sit beneath it, shifting away from fragmented, agency-by-agency approvals toward a unified national strategy aiming to maximize economic value while managing environmental and infrastructure concerns. Proposed Scope and Pillars of the National Data Center Policy Framework The proposed framework would cover all types of data centers, including internal or captive facilities operated within a company or its affiliates, rather than only commercial third-party providers. If adopted in this form, companies running private data centers purely for internal purposes would also become subject to regulatory oversight. Minimum safety and operational standards would be established, with uniform enforcement across all categories. The committee endorsed a draft policy framework with four key pillars: Industrial classification: Data centers exceeding 2 MW would be classified as industrial operations, which may require factory licenses and environmental impact assessments under the Factory Act. Resource pricing: Utility rates would be structured to reflect both direct and indirect costs, supporting green energy and green data center standards. Centralized screening: A centralized review would evaluate project suitability and resource allocation. Operators may be required to submit proposals through periodic “pitching” rounds, where projects are competitively assessed on their potential economic and strategic benefits to Thailand. Digital ecosystem: The framework would prioritize data sovereignty, tax incentives, and conditions promoting domestic digital businesses, AI, and cloud infrastructure. Multidimensional Evaluation Criteria and Subcommittees Four subcommittees will be established to develop standards responsible for the following dimensions: Economic: Criteria for assessing the economic viability of data center projects, for use in prioritizing data centers based on infrastructure readiness, demand type (including AI factories),
Read More
September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
Read More
September 4, 2026
Blind boxes and collectibles have become increasingly popular, driven by the excitement of not knowing which character or design will be revealed until the package is opened. While most visible in the art toy market, the same concept is also used in the food industry. Confectionery, snacks, and other food products are sometimes sold with toys, character figures, cards, or other collectibles. A package might, for example, contain one of ten possible characters, with consumers knowing that an item is included but not which one they will receive. Some collections may also feature rare or “secret” items. For food businesses, however, adding a randomized toy or collectible involves more than a marketing decision. The food, the nonfood item, and the randomized mechanism may each raise different regulatory considerations in Thailand. Thai FDA Requirements for Nonfood Objects Packaged with Food The main food regulatory consideration is Ministry of Public Health Notification No. 310 B.E. 2551 (2008), which regulates food packaged together with things or objects that are not food. Under Notification No. 310, certain nonfood objects may be packaged together with food where they fall within specified exceptions, including objects that serve the following purposes: Maintaining the quality or standard of the food, such as a desiccant or oxygen absorber; Serving as a seasoning or as part of food preparation, such as chili powder sachets or seasoning sachets contained in instant noodle packages; or Functioning as an eating or food-preparation utensil, such as a spoon or fork included with instant noodles. Other nonfood objects that do not fall within these categories generally should not be placed inside the food container together with the food. Where a toy, collectible, or other nonfood object is intended to be sold together with a food product, businesses should therefore carefully consider the nature of
Read More
September 4, 2026
Foreign business restrictions on telecommunications, treasury center businesses, and intragroup support services were eased when Thailand published the Ministerial Regulation Prescribing Service Businesses Not Requiring Permission for Foreign Business Operations (No. 5) B.E. 2569 (2026) in the Government Gazette on August 28, 2026. The ministerial regulation expands the categories of service businesses that foreign investors may operate without a foreign business license (FBL) under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (FBA). Of particular relevance to the telecommunications, fintech, and technology sectors, the ministerial regulation exempts: Type 1 telecommunications licensees, which do not have their own networks; Treasury center businesses operated in accordance with Thailand’s exchange control regulations; and Certain intragroup administrative, human resources, and information technology management services. Telecommunications Services Foreign-owned businesses providing telecommunications services under a type 1 telecommunications license may now operate without obtaining an FBL. This may streamline market entry for qualifying telecommunications and digital infrastructure businesses. The exemption applies only to the FBA licensing requirement. Operators must continue to comply with applicable requirements under the Telecommunications Business Act and the regulations of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission, and the change does not affect foreign ownership restrictions applicable to type 2 or type 3 telecommunications businesses. Treasury Center Businesses The ministerial regulation also exempts qualifying treasury center businesses from the FBL requirement. This may facilitate centralized treasury functions in Thailand, including liquidity management, foreign exchange management, and intragroup funding arrangements. Treasury center operations remain subject to applicable requirements of the Bank of Thailand and other competent authorities. Intragroup Administrative, HR, and IT Services Certain administrative, human resources, and information technology management services provided between affiliated entities are also exempt, provided the relevant entities satisfy prescribed ownership or management criteria. The exemption is available where the service provider and recipient are related through specified ownership
Read More