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

September 9, 2011

Foreigners Beware: Penalties for Working Without a Permit May Be Dire

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

An increasing number of foreigners are finding investment in Thailand attractive, creating a positive impact on the Thai economy. Undoubtedly, one of the effects of increased foreign direct investment is a greater number of foreigners coming to Thailand for a variety of business-related purposes: conducting business, taking a position of employment, accompanying family members assigned to work in Thailand, and even attending business meetings and seminars.

These foreigners need to be aware that if their purpose of staying in Thailand is to proceed with any work-related activity, either permanently or temporarily, they are required to obtain a work permit from the Department of Employment, Ministry of Labor, prior to starting work.

The Alien Working Act B.E. 2551 (2008) defines of the term “work” as any activity whereby one exerts energy or uses knowledge, whether or not in consideration for wages or other benefits. The definition of work under the Alien Working Act is rather broad, as it covers performing all actions relating to business deemed as work under the law (and this even covers volunteer work). For example, if a person took part in negotiations, attended or spoke at a conference, provided technical support, or sourced for a local supplier, each of these actions would be considered work. Most foreigners who enter Thailand for a short business trip of one or two days are not aware that the purpose of their visit requires a work permit in accordance with Thai laws.

Working in Thailand without a work permit entails a penalty on the violator, ranging from a fine, imprisonment and deportation to, in the worst case scenario, prohibition from reentering Thailand. Under the Alien Working Act, a foreigner who engages in work without obtaining the proper work permit is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years and/or a fine from 2,000 baht to 100,000 baht. In practice, however, the authorities usually settle the case and deport the person from Thailand.

Foreigners working in Thailand should be aware that authorities have recently been more active in pursuing those who work in Thailand without permission. The number of foreigners arrested for working without permission in the past few years has increased markedly. And this includes not only unskilled workers, but also skilled workers, technicians, specialists, management personnel, and nationals of many countries, from neighboring Southeast Asian states to European and North American countries.

Currently, in addition to the charges levied under the Alien Working Act, the authorities can impose penalties as stipulated under the Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979) on violators as well, by prohibiting foreigners found guilty of working without permission from reentering the country (otherwise known as being “blacklisted”). Under the Immigration Act, a foreigner who is deported or has been sent out of the country by the competent officials is excluded from reentering the Kingdom.

When a foreigner who performs work without permission is caught, the authorities will take legal actions against the violator. If it is found that the foreigner is guilty of working without permission, the immigration official will deport the violator from the Kingdom and record their profile in the Immigration Bureau’s blacklist database, to prevent them from reentering Thailand in the future.

Given the seriousness of the penalties, it is highly advisable that foreigners who wish to perform work in Thailand, permanently or temporarily, spend the time and relatively minor financial effort to apply for a proper work permit.

However, an “ordinary” longer-term work permit may not be a suitable option for executives at multinational corporations who manage and oversee their company’s operations in many countries or persons who would like to perform temporary or urgent work in Thailand, such as attend a business meeting with a local company or supplier. For these individuals, the full work permit application process may be too arduous, as it normally takes two to three weeks to prepare and process an application due to the volume of supporting documents.

To address this problem and encourage an investment-friendly environment, the Alien Working Act allows foreigners intending to stay in the Kingdom for a short period of time to notify the necessity and urgency of their work to the Department of Employment instead of applying for an ordinary work permit. The notification may take a couple of hours to process and be approved. It should be noted that only the performance of “necessary and urgent” work is eligible for this type of permission, and the maximum period the foreigner will be allowed to stay to perform such work is 15 days per entry, inclusive of weekends and holidays. This type of application may seem like an onerous process for such a short visit, but it will ensure due compliance with the law and prevent any possible headaches resulting from legal violations.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 1, 2026
Thailand has taken another step toward liberalizing its foreign business framework, exempting additional service activities and derivatives brokerage or agency businesses from the licensing requirements of the Foreign Business Act (FBA). Since the FBA came into effect, Thailand has taken a measured approach to opening its economy to foreign investment. While the FBA regulates foreign participation in businesses that may affect domestic interests, the framework has also evolved to allow foreign participation in certain business activities where sector-specific laws and regulatory frameworks already provide sufficient oversight, making additional FBA restrictions unnecessary. This is particularly true where Thai businesses are sufficiently capable of competing in certain service sectors, or where liberalization is intended to facilitate the provision of services among companies within the same corporate group. Against this backdrop, two new ministerial regulations have been issued pursuant to the FBA. Service Businesses Under the FBA Under the FBA, certain categories of business are restricted for foreign operators. List 3 of the FBA sets out businesses that foreigners may operate only if they obtain a foreign business license (FBL) or a foreign business certificate (FBC), or unless a specific exemption applies. List 3 (21) covers “other service businesses,” which is a catch-all provision that captures a wide range of service businesses not specifically enumerated elsewhere in the FBA. In practice, this means that most service activities carried on by foreigners in Thailand require an FBL or FBC unless otherwise exempted. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the FBA provides a mechanism to address this breadth by empowering the Minister of Commerce to issue ministerial regulations excluding specific types of service businesses from List Three (21). Once a service business is so excluded, foreigners may operate it without obtaining an FBL or FBC. Prior to the new regulations, four ministerial regulations had been issued to
Read More
August 31, 2026
Thailand has introduced a new regulatory framework that may expose foreign nationals who violate the Foreign Business Act (FBA) to deportation. The Regulation of the Office of the Prime Minister on Deportation B.E. 2569 was published in the Government Gazette on August 27, 2026. The regulation establishes an administrative process for referring foreign nationals for deportation where this is deemed necessary in the interests of public order or public morality. It does not create new substantive deportation powers, but it expressly identifies unlawful business conduct under the FBA—including nominee arrangements—as grounds for referral. Grounds for Deportation Referral The regulation sets out five grounds that may give rise to a referral to the relevant authorities: Unlawful entry into, or unlawful stay in, Thailand in violation of immigration laws. Unlawful employment or engagement in work in violation of laws governing the employment of foreign nationals. Carrying on business in violation of the FBA, including through the use of nominee arrangements. Forging official documents or using forged official documents. Committing an offense punishable by imprisonment of five years or more. The framework takes a broad approach, extending not only to the perpetrators of these acts but also to those who facilitate, instigate, or otherwise support such acts. Deportation Risk Following a Criminal Judgment Where a foreign national has committed any of the above offenses and has fully served the sentence imposed pursuant to a final judgment, the interior minister has the power to order deportation. This power also applies where a court has issued a final judgment sentencing a foreign national to imprisonment but has suspended the execution of the sentence, or has imposed a fine. A deportation order may also specify a period during which the foreign national is prohibited from reentering Thailand. FBA Noncompliance: Broader Consequences Noncompliance with the FBA—including
Read More
August 24, 2026
Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration (DICA) has published the guidelines it uses to assess and approve company names for registration in the country. The guidelines, which were published on May 18, 2026, explain how DICA determines whether a proposed name is identical or too similar to an existing name, and they identify words and expressions that may be prohibited or restricted. Businesses planning to incorporate in Myanmar should expect DICA to scrutinize proposed names more closely than it has in the past. Prohibitions on Company Names The Myanmar Companies Law prohibits company names that are identical or similar to existing company names, and DICA’s internal assessment guidelines explain how this rule applies in practice. Under the guidelines, DICA may reject a proposed company name if the proposed name: Is identical or nearly identical to an existing company name; Differs from an existing company name only in punctuation, capitalization, spelling, or transliteration; Only adds words such as “Group,” “Holding,” “International,” “Myanmar,” or “Family” to an existing company name; Merely rearranges the words in an existing company name; Is pronounced similarly to an existing name; Uses the same brand name as an existing company, even if the company carries out different business activities; or Uses an existing brand name together with an abbreviation of that brand name or a shortened form of the name or business description. DICA may also consider whether a proposed name could give the impression that two companies are related, even if they operate in different business sectors. In addition, DICA may review a company name even after registration. If it later determines that the name does not comply with the Myanmar Companies Law or is otherwise unsuitable, DICA may direct the company to change its name under section 26 of the Myanmar Companies Law.
Read More
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