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 28, 2016

Direct Sale and Direct Marketing Act: Draft Amendments Could Pose Challenges to Operators

Informed Counsel

In recent years, the Thai government has attempted to strike a balance between attracting investment and protecting consumer interests. On the one hand, it has tried to liberalize foreign investment, eradicate bureaucratic red tape, and introduce investment promotion and investor-friendly policies through tax and non-tax incentives. On the other hand, it has enacted a number of laws and regulations to enhance consumer protection.

Despite this balancing act, certain laws and regulations still impose stringent requirements on business operators. This includes the Direct Sale and Direct Marketing Act B.E. 2545 (2002) (Act), which requires business operators to register with the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) prior to commencing a direct sale or direct marketing business in Thailand. Business operators, and particularly foreign business operators, have faced frequent impediments during registration, caused by stringent processes, policy reviews, and documentation requirements, which are imposed by officials who are tasked with enforcing and applying the Act.

The officials typically request applicants to revise certain documents, such as their product catalogs, marketing plans, and benefit and compensation schemes, on the basis that they do not meet the officials’ guidelines. These guidelines, however, are not publicly available. Therefore, not only are business operators faced with strict requirements, but the requirements are also obscure, resulting in a registration process that is time consuming and unpredictable.

A number of draft amendments to the Act have been proposed which will introduce significant changes to its substantive and procedural provisions. This article discusses the amendments, and the impact on business operators and consumers.

Key Amendments and Requirements for Applications

The amendments introduce a definition for a “company,” which was not previously defined. This is intended to limit qualified applicants to juristic persons that have registered capital (i.e., only limited companies under the Civil and Commercial Code and public limited companies under the law relating to Public Limited Companies).

Companies that qualify for registration are subsequently required to fulfill statutory requirements, including the need to have paid-up capital amounting to not less than THB 10 million, and not revoking the direct sale or direct marketing registration within a period of five years prior to the application submission date.

Directors or persons who have the power to manage the company must not be: (1) declared bankrupt; (2) adjudged incompetent or quasi-incompetent; (3) imprisoned by a final judgement, excluding imprisonment for negligence or misdemeanors; (4) a director or an authorized person in another company which has already been granted direct sale or direct marketing registration; and (5) a director or an authorized person in any company whose registration has been revoked.

A direct sale and direct marketing committee is prohibited from holding more than 10 percent of the shares in a company conducting a direct sale or direct marketing business within a period of one year prior to and during their time in office, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.

To apply for registration, applicants are required to provide a guarantee to the registrar in accordance with the amount prescribed by Ministerial Regulation, but this amount must not be less than THB 500,000. The guarantee may be in the form of cash, a bank guarantee, government bonds, bonds issued by state enterprises, or other properties which are stipulated in a notification of the direct sale and direct marketing committee. This guarantee may be used to pay damages incurred by consumers as a result of breaches of buy-sell agreements committed by the operators.

The amendments also impose reporting duties on both direct sale and direct marketing operators. If operators relocate their office, they are required to notify the registrar within 15 days from the relocation date. In addition, operators must submit reports on their business operations to the registrar, in accordance with the forms, guidelines, and periods prescribed in a notification issued by the direct sale and direct marketing committee. Any transfer or cessation of operations must be approved by the registrar, in conjunction with publishing a notification in a local newspaper and informing consumers by registered mail or through another medium of communication.

Increased Protection for Consumers

The amendments impose a number of additional responsibilities and liabilities, including the requirement that direct sale operators must be jointly liable to consumers who purchase goods or services from independent distributors, even though ownership of such goods or services is transferred from the operators to the independent distributors.

The responsibility to prepare buy-sell documents for goods or services also falls on operators, and such documents must be provided to consumers, together with the purchased goods or services. For direct sales, the independent distributors must hand over the documents to consumers in place of the direct sale operators. In the event that operators or independent distributors breach these statutory duties, the buy-sell agreements will not be binding on consumers.

Penalties for Registration Violations

The registrar has the authority to impose corrective measures on violators for non-serious violations before revoking a registration, while serious violations will lead to a registration being revoked. The amendments also impose criminal penalties on those who fail to comply with the registrar’s orders, or who violate provisions on consumer advertisements and communication.

The amendments provide a transition period for operators that have already registered for direct sale and direct marketing. These operators must comply with the requirements within the prescribed time frame permitted for such matters, as stipulated under the amendments—otherwise, their registrations will be automatically revoked.

While the amendments aim to protect consumers from unaccountable business operators, the additional requirements could adversely impact existing business operators that are unable to meet even more stringent requirements. If the registrations of these operators are revoked, the government may consider the consumers who were negatively affected by the revocation, and remedial measures may be enacted to counteract any ensuing issues. The draft amendments have now been submitted to the National Assembly for further consideration, and business operators in this sector will be closely monitoring the progress of their enactment.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 22, 2026
A new decree in Vietnam brings significant implementation clarity to the country’s existing extended producer responsibility (EPR) legal framework. An EPR mechanism was first codified in Vietnam in the 2020 Law on Environmental Protection amid ongoing challenges surrounding the collection and treatment of product and packaging waste. The mechanism was progressively detailed through Decree No. 08/2022/ND‑CP and its successive amendments, but the regulatory framework remained insufficiently developed, notably in terms of support mechanisms for waste collection, recycling, and treatment. The newly launched regulations in Decree No. 110/2026/ND-CP (Decree 110), issued on April 1, 2026, and taking effect on May 25, 2026, stipulate fully and clearly the responsibility of manufacturers and importers to recycle products and packaging and to treat waste. Some key provisions of Decree 110 for manufacturers, importers, and related stakeholders are presented below. Subjects of EPR The Law on Environmental Protection assigns responsibility to manufacturers and importers for product and packaging recycling (under Article 54) or waste collection and treatment (under Article 55), depending on the type of products and packaging they produce or import. Decree 110 elaborates on these EPR provisions by specifying the responsible entities and listing out the types of products and packaging subject to recycling and waste treatment responsibilities. Decree 110 clarifies the responsible entities in special cases, such as when products under the same brand are made by multiple manufacturers, when there is a contract manufacturing or entrusted import relationship, and when the manufacturer or importer is part of a corporate group. Notably, exemptions may be applied in some scenarios, such as for manufacturers and importers of products and packaging exclusively for export, temporary import and re-export, or research and testing purposes, as well as for entities with annual revenue from related products not exceeding VND 30 billion. Recycling Responsibilities Decree 110
April 15, 2026
On March 31, 2026, Vietnam’s government issued Decree 102/2026/ND-CP (Decree 102), which amends Decree 75/2019/ND-CP on administrative sanctions for competition law violations (Decree 75). Effective from May 20, 2026, the new decree introduces a number of significant changes aimed at strengthening enforcement, revising penalty structures, and broadening the range of remedial measures, primarily for violations related to economic concentration. Revised Penalties for Economic Concentration Violations Decree 102 significantly revises the penalties for violations related to economic concentration. Failure to notify an economic concentration; implementing an economic concentration before clearance Under the new framework, Articles 14 and 15 of Decree 75 have been amended to impose a range of monetary fines, rather than relying solely on percentage‑based penalties as under the previous regime, for violations involving the failure to notify an economic concentration or the implementation of an economic concentration prior to clearance. The fines range from VND 500 million to VND 1 billion for each enterprise participating in a concentration with combined assets, revenues, or purchase value below VND 3,000 billion in the preceding fiscal year, capped at 5% of the violating enterprise’s total turnover in the relevant market. For concentrations meeting or exceeding the VND 3,000 billion threshold across those same metrics, the fines increase to VND 1 billion to VND 2 billion per enterprise, also subject to the 5% cap. These differentiated thresholds allow penalties to better reflect the size of the transaction and its potential competitive impact. Non-compliance with conditional approvals Enterprises that do not implement or only partially implement the conditions specified in a conditional economic concentration approval decision face fines ranging from 1% to 3% of total turnover in the relevant market during the fiscal year preceding the violation. Decree 102 also adds a new remedial measure requiring enterprises to fully implement all conditions
March 31, 2026
Against the backdrop of Vietnam’s rapid economic and technological transformation and its ambition to build a knowledge-driven economy, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law on Higher Education No. 125/2025/QH15 on December 10, 2025, The new law took effect on January 1, 2026, replacing Law on Higher Education No. 08/2012/QH13 of 2012 and its subsequent amendments after more than a decade of implementation. The new law reflects a significant policy shift toward enhancing the institutional autonomy of higher education institutions (“HEIs”)—universities and other university-level institutions. By granting broader autonomy, Vietnam aims to enable HEIs to operate more proactively, better respond to market needs, and improve the quality and efficiency of education and research activities. Comprehensive Institutional Autonomy in HEIs The new law marks a significant shift by granting HEIs comprehensive autonomy as a statutory right, within the bounds of the licensed scope of educational operation and the legal framework, rather than a conditional right as provided under the former law. Under the new law, HEIs are empowered to exercise autonomy over their academic expertise, training, scientific research, international cooperation, organizational structure, personnel, finance, and other higher education activities. The expansion of institutional autonomy is also accompanied by a correspondingly strengthened framework of institutional accountability. However, Vietnam maintains a certain degree of control and imposes restrictions on institutional autonomy in sensitive and strategically important areas. These controls and restrictions include limitations on training autonomy in the majors of teacher training, national defense, and security; and restrictions on financial and personnel management autonomy for HEIs under the administration of the Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Public Security. New Model for Curriculum Development The new law removes the concept of “opening a training major” and focuses regulation on how training programs are developed and delivered. Under the previous regime,
March 31, 2026
Thailand’s Department of Business Development (DBD) has issued a regulation imposing additional requirements for amending a company’s directors and signatory power to designate a foreign national as an authorized signatory of the company. This measure, effective April 1, 2026, has been introduced in response to the widespread use of Thai nationals as nominees to conduct business on behalf of foreigners, a practice considered to have an adverse impact on the country’s economic stability and security. The new measures are particularly concerned with changes to the authorized signatory structure of companies that originally had only Thai directors authorized to sign for and bind the company. Under the new rules, any amendment that results in a foreign national becoming an authorized signatory—whether solely or jointly—for such a company will be subject to additional verification. Directors signing an application to register such an amendment to the company’s authorized signatory structure are now also required to provide a statement confirming that all shareholders of the company have made genuine contributions and no Thai national has assisted with, supported, or participated in business activities in a nominee capacity. Implications Companies intending to appoint foreign directors as authorized signatories should be aware of the increased regulatory requirements and assessments. Additional documentation and confirmations may be required as part of the registration process.