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​ 

November 7, 2025
Thailand and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) titled “Cooperation to Diversify Global Critical Minerals Supply Chains and Promote Investments” on October 26, 2025, signaling a new strategic alignment aimed at developing Thailand’s mineral sector, particularly in rare earth elements (REEs). The MOU has implications for investments in technology, manufacturing, and other related sectors. This update outlines the key provisions of the MOU and the potential opportunities and legal navigating points for businesses. Objectives The primary driver of this agreement is the US initiative to diversify global supply chains for critical minerals and reduce reliance on current market leaders, particularly China. For Thailand, it represents a major opportunity to attract high-tech investment and develop its downstream processing industries. The cooperation is set to focus on five main areas: Technical knowledge: Exchange of technical expertise and international best practices to strengthen Thailand’s mining and processing sector. Joint cooperation: Establishing workshops, seminars, and scientific collaboration to boost innovation. Regulatory practice: Promoting good governance and streamlining regulatory and licensing procedures. Information sharing: Sharing data on potential projects and global market prices. Full-value chain: The MOU covers the entire mineral lifecycle, from exploration and extraction to processing, refining, and recycling. “First Opportunity to Invest” Clause The most debated provision within the MOU states that “participants expect to have the first opportunity to invest . . . in critical minerals assets that may be sold in Thailand.” Business implications: This clause is widely interpreted as granting US companies a first look or preferential access to investment opportunities in Thailand’s critical minerals sector. This could be a significant advantage for US-based or affiliated companies in mining, technology, and energy seeking to secure a foothold in a developing REE supply chain. Thai government position: Thai officials, including the prime minister, have publicly clarified
Read More
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 29, 2025
On September 15, 2025, Thailand’s Senate approved a draft amendment to the Labor Protection Act (LPA), which is currently awaiting publication in the Government Gazette. The amendment, which will take effect 30 days after publication, extends labor protections to certain service contractors working for state entities, enhances maternity and spousal support leave, and updates employer reporting obligations. Expanded Protections for State-Contracted Service Providers The amendment adds a section to the LPA that extends core labor protections to individuals engaged by government bodies under service contracts. This provision covers workers hired by central, regional, and local government agencies; state enterprises governed by the State Enterprise Labor Relations Act; public organizations; and other state agencies when these entities retain individuals under service procurement contracts (or similar arrangements) and exercise supervision, direction, and control over their work. In such cases, the hiring agencies must provide terms no less favorable than those required under the LPA for remuneration, weekly holidays, traditional holidays, annual leave, sick leave, maternity leave, working days and hours, and rest periods. Ministerial regulations will establish specific criteria for implementation. Disputes regarding rights and duties under this provision will fall under Labor Court jurisdiction. This change aligns the treatment of controlled service contractors with that of regular employees, addressing a longstanding coverage gap in the public sector. Enhanced Maternity Leave and New Caregiving Provisions The amendment includes a maternity leave entitlement of up to 120 days per pregnancy (an increase from the previous 98 days), unless otherwise prescribed by royal decree, and also introduces a new postnatal caregiving leave for mothers in complex medical situations who have used their childbirth leave, granting up to 15 additional days to care for children who are at risk of complications, have abnormalities, or have disabilities. This supplemental leave requires support from a medical
Read More