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

June 5, 2019

First Peer-to-Peer Lending Regulation Issued by the Bank of Thailand

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

In recent years, peer-to-peer (P2P) lending technology has taken root in Asia, particularly in China, Singapore, and Indonesia, and the P2P market is continuing to expand significantly. The business model allows lenders and borrowers to link up via an online platform. This disrupts the traditional banking model that requires a financial institution to act as an intermediary. For individuals, this means that underbanked populations are able to secure loans where previously a lack of credit history or little access to financial service institutions posed considerable obstacles. For businesses, this can mean faster access to capital and a simplified process for reaching a broad base of potential investors.   

As it has in other countries, P2P is expected to transform the lending business and reduce funding gaps in the Thai market. The Bank of Thailand (BOT) first announced their intention to regulate P2P lending in September 2018, and in January 2019 circulated a draft of the proposed regulations in order to seek opinions and comments from interested parties. This has roughly coincided with a precipitous decline in the P2P lending market in China, which underlines the importance of regulating this nascent industry. Thailand—like some of its fellow ASEAN members—has chosen to move ahead carefully and establish a sound regulatory framework at an early stage in the local sector’s development.   

On April 29, 2019, the BOT issued Notification 4/2562 Re: The Determination of Rules, Procedures, and Conditions for Peer-to-Peer Lending Businesses and Platforms. The notification took effect the following day.    

The notification is Thailand’s first legislation relating to P2P lending, and it provides a number of parameters within which P2P platform providers and P2P lenders must operate. It defines a P2P platform provider as a person who provides an electronic system or network for P2P lending, and a lender as a natural or juristic person who offers a loan through an electronic system or network (excluding crowdfunding providers). Key provisions of the notification are below.

P2P Platform Provider   

The BOT has devoted a good deal of attention to setting out the structure and activities of P2P platform providers. They have stipulated that a P2P platform provider must:

  • not be a financial institution (including banks, although subsidiaries of banks are permitted);
  • be a private company or public company incorporated in Thailand;
  • have paid-in capital of at least THB 5 million; and
  • have at least 75% of its total shares held by Thais.

Directors of the platform provider must be “fit and proper,” meaning that they must not have been involved in or accused of fraud or corruption, must not demonstrate a lack of qualifications or professional standards, and must be financially sound.

Custodians    

Platform providers are prohibited from holding the money, property, and securities of lenders and borrowers, so a qualified custodian is required. Custodians must be either authorized custodians under Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations or authorized commercial banks (for escrow accounts) under BOT regulations.

Borrowers and Credit Limits   

Under this notification, borrowers must be natural persons who:

  • have the capability to perform debts;
  • are not platform providers;
  • are not directors or an authorized person of, or a major shareholder in, the provider; and
  • have not already obtained personal loans from three lenders.

The notification also prescribes credit limits for obtaining loans, depending on the type of loan. For example, a loan for consumer purposes is subject to a credit limit that is contingent on the borrower’s income or cash inflow. If the average monthly income is less than THB 30,000, the credit limit cannot exceed 1.5 times the average monthly income or the cash inflow in the consumer’s deposit account. For borrowers whose average monthly income is THB 30,000 or more, the credit limit is five times the average monthly income or cash inflow in the consumer’s deposit account. In these cases, the average must be calculated from a period of six months or more. If the loan is for business purposes, the credit limit is set at THB 50 million.   

In both cases, the interest rate for loans offered through a P2P lending platform must not exceed 15% per year, as laid out in the Civil and Commercial Code of Thailand.

Lenders   

Unlike borrowers, lenders can be either natural or juristic persons. They must possess knowledge and understanding of loans and the risks associated with P2P lending platforms by conducting client suitability assessments before providing loans. Additionally, a lender must not be a platform provider. There are credit limits proposed for the lenders under the notification, but materially for individual lenders the amount should not exceed THB 500,000 within one year.

Regulatory Clarity   

Prior to this enumeration by the BOT, the legal status of P2P lending activities was not consistent or clear-cut, with some types of P2P lending being strictly prohibited without a license from the BOT or the Securities and Exchange Commission of Thailand. With this P2P lending regulation—and the upcoming crowdfunding regulation that is expected to be issued by the SEC later this year—P2P lending businesses will be recognized and specifically regulated in Thailand.

It is hoped that this will lead to the sustainable growth of alternative finance in Thailand and will provide a more accessible option for consumers and entrepreneurs. As greater flexibility in how money flows to and from various sectors of society—coupled with sound regulation—prosperity and opportunity should become more open and available to previously marginalized individuals. Companies looking to get involved in working toward these goals should be sure they are compliant with the laws and regulations so that they can focus on making the promise of alternative finance a reality.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 9, 2026
On April 28, 2026, the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) issued Notification No. 18/2026 introducing the new Foreign Remittance Business Regulations. The new regulations apply to companies intending to operate foreign remittance businesses in Myanmar that are not licensed banks, non-bank financial institutions, or other financial institutions. The regulations supersede and replace the previous regulatory framework governing foreign remittance businesses under CBM Notification No. 21/2019. While the overall structure remains familiar, the new regulations introduce more detailed requirements for licensing, operations, reporting, and compliance, with a stronger focus on transparency and regulatory oversight. Broader Licensing Requirements Under the new regulations, applicants must submit detailed business plans describing the use of information technology and mobile platforms, along with clear plans for handling remittances from workers abroad and resolving customer complaints. Financial Thresholds and Reporting Requirements The baseline financial thresholds remain unchanged. Licensees must maintain a security deposit of MMK 100 million in an escrow account, along with a separate revolving fund dedicated solely to remittance operations. The new regulations introduce more structured reporting obligations. Licensees are now required to submit daily remittance transaction data by the next business day before noon, in addition to monthly and periodic reporting requirements. Foreign bank account statements must also be submitted regularly, and licensees must provide updates on business operations every six months. Strengthened AML and CFT Framework The new regulations place a greater emphasis on anti-money laundering (AML) and counter financing of terrorism (CFT), with tighter controls over management changes. Any changes in shareholding, share transfers, or the appointment of key management personnel such as the managing director require prior approval from the CBM. Licensing Fees and Validity The new regulations increase licensing costs, while maintaining the same validity period of three years. The new regulations provide more detailed grounds for suspension and
Read More
May 25, 2026
After several years of policy discussion and continued efforts led by the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) to relax the list of reserved businesses under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (FBA), the reform process has now reached a significant milestone. On May 12, 2026, the Thai cabinet approved in principle two draft subordinate legislative instruments aimed at delisting certain reserved business activities under the FBA and reducing licensing requirements for foreign business operators. These developments signal a renewed and concrete effort by the government to modernize Thailand’s business regulatory framework in order to attract foreign investment and boost Thailand’s competitiveness in the global market. Nine Businesses Set for FBA Delisting Below is a list of the nine businesses that are being targeted for delisting from the FBA’s restrictions. A draft ministerial regulation would delist the first eight reserved businesses, while a royal decree has been drafted to delist the ninth business: Telecommunications services (Type 1 license only, covering operators without their own telecommunications infrastructure), under the supervision of the Office of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission. Treasury center services subject to the Foreign Exchange Control Act B.E. 2485 and under the supervision of the Bank of Thailand. Securities-collateralized lending, pursuant to the laws governing securities and exchange and derivatives regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Agency, dealer, advisory, or fund management services relating to derivatives where the underlying assets fall outside the scope of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003) Intra-group shared services, including administrative, human resources, and IT functions Intra-group domestic debt guarantee services Leasing of partial space for installation of financial service machines and automatic vending machines for employee use Petroleum drilling services Trading of agricultural product derivatives through a futures exchange, with physical delivery or receipt of agricultural products at a futures exchange–designated
Read More
March 5, 2026
Amid increasing financial globalization, Vietnam’s establishment of an International Financial Center (IFC) represents a strategic initiative to attract high-quality foreign investment and enhance the country’s position in the global financial system. In support of this objective, a Specialized Court was introduced under Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 as a dedicated dispute resolution mechanism within the IFC framework. The Specialized Court at the IFC was subsequently operationalized by Law on the Specialized Court No. 150/2025/QH15, effective from January 1, 2026. Organizational Structure of the Specialized Court The Specialized Court at the IFC is a court within the system of the People’s Courts, organized and operating in accordance with the Law on the Specialized Court, and vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate and resolve cases at the IFC. The Specialized Court is located in Ho Chi Minh City and comprises (i) a Court of First Instance; (ii) a Court of Appeal, and (iii) a supporting apparatus. Jurisdiction of the Specialized Court The jurisdiction of the Specialized Court at the IFC is strictly defined based on both (i) the subject matter of the cases and (ii) the membership status of the parties involved. Specifically, the Specialized Court has jurisdiction over (except for cases involving public interests or the interests of the state) the following: Disputes arising from investment and business activities. Requests for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of judgments and decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitral awards. Requests related to dispute resolution by arbitration. Other disputes directly related to investment and business activities (to be specified by the Supreme People’s Court). Additionally, at least one party in the case must be a member of the IFC. The IFC’s membership status is established through registration, recognition as a member, or the grant of a license for establishment and operation within the IFC. In the
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More