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

May 6, 2025

Key Findings from OECD Review of Thailand’s Competition Law

Subscribe to Updates

On May 2, 2025, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT), in cooperation with the OECD, held a conference to discuss the results of the OECD Peer Review of Thailand’s competition law and policy. This review, conducted under the second phase of the OECD-Thailand Country Program, marks a significant milestone in Thailand’s ongoing institutional reform. Tilleke & Gibbins’ trade competition experts were invited to participate in both the program and the conference.

The OECD Peer Review aimed to assess the current state of Thailand’s legal and regulatory environment surrounding competition law and policies, pinpoint strengths and weaknesses, and offer recommendations on potential future development. This article highlights the review’s key findings and recommendations, and their implications for businesses operating in Thailand.

Institutional Framework: Room for Improvement

Competition law in Thailand has undergone significant transformation, particularly since the enactment of the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA). This landmark legislation aimed to revolutionize the competition regime, notably by amending important legal provisions to enhance public enforcement capabilities and establishing the TCCT as an independent authority separate from government ministries, endowed with its own budget and powers to enforce competition law across key areas: anticompetitive agreements, abuse of dominant market positions, merger control, and unfair trade practices. The goal was to create a more efficient, flexible, and independent agency and to prevent political intervention.

However, the OECD Peer Review points out a major impediment. The TCCT faces considerable budget and human resource constraints, which may impact its enforcement capacity. Its budget is comparatively low by international and regional standards, and only a fraction of its staff is dedicated to core competition enforcement (merger control and anticompetitive behavior). Furthermore, there is room for the TCCT to continue its improvements in expertise and efficiency—areas the TCCT has been attempting to shore up in recent years.

Scope of Application: Key Exclusions

A critical aspect noted by the OECD is the TCA’s scope of application, which contains broad exemptions in relation to the following areas:

  • State-owned enterprises (SOEs): While the 2017 TCA aimed to reduce the scope of exemptions for SOEs, SOEs remain predominantly outside the TCA’s reach if their undertakings relate to national security, public interest, public utilities, or societal interests based on law or cabinet resolutions. In practice, the TCCT appears to consider most SOEs exempt, even when competing with private players, which can create an uneven playing field.
  • Regulated sectors: Businesses specifically regulated by other sectoral laws with jurisdiction over competition matters (like telecommunications, energy, banking, and insurance) are excluded from the TCA. However, the competition rules and enforcement powers within these sectoral laws vary substantially, leading to a fragmented landscape and potential enforcement gaps. Clarity is needed on jurisdictional boundaries, especially in cross-sector cases, and the principle of competitive neutrality should be observed.
  • Extraterritoriality: It remains unclear whether the TCA applies to anticompetitive conduct occurring outside Thailand but having effects within the country. The current interpretation seems to limit enforcement against foreign entities without a Thai presence, potentially leaving international cartels or foreign mergers affecting the Thai market unaddressed.

Enforcement: Obstacles and Need for Reforms

Competition enforcement in Thailand is still developing, and the past seven years saw a low number of enforcement cases reported to the public. The OECD Peer Review Report outlines the following challenges:

  • Standard of proof: Hardcore cartels (with agreements on price-fixing, output restrictions, market allocation, or bid rigging) and abuse of dominance are exclusively criminal offenses. This requires a very high standard of proof (“beyond reasonable doubt”), making successful prosecution difficult. Most jurisdictions make administrative tools available for competition authorities to impose fines on infringements.
  • Rule of reason for cartels: Even hardcore cartels are assessed under a rule of reason, requiring proof of market effects and potentially exempting collusion with a combined market share of below 10%. This contrasts with the standard international practice of treating hardcore cartels as per se (inherently) illegal.
  • Bid rigging: Ambiguity exists regarding jurisdiction over bid rigging in public procurement. In Thailand, the National Anti-Corruption Commission typically has jurisdiction over public procurement in regard to anticorruption concerns, potentially leaving a gap in competition-focused enforcement.
  • Abuse of dominance: The assessment focuses more on the “unfairness” or “unreasonableness” of conduct rather than its impact on competition. Determining dominance itself relies heavily on market share and revenue thresholds, potentially overlooking other market power indicators.
  • Detection: Enforcement hinges primarily on complaints filed by business operators or any third party. A leniency program or whistleblower protections have not been formally introduced, but both tools are crucial for cartel detection globally.
  • Transparency: The TCCT generally does not publish a full version of their decisions but only brief summaries. This may hinder legal certainty, deterrence, and public understanding.

Merger Control: A Complex Dual System

Thailand operates a two-tiered merger control system:

  1. Premerger (ex-ante) approval: Required for mergers that may cause a monopoly or result in a dominant position. The TCCT can approve, approve with remedies, or prohibit these mergers.
  2. Postmerger (ex-post) notification: Required within seven days post-completion for mergers that may substantially reduce competition but do not fulfill the ex-ante criteria. The TCCT has no power to intervene (impose remedies or prohibit) in these notified mergers, even if anticompetitive concerns may be found.

Major issues with this two-tiered system identified by the OECD include:

  • Ineffective ex-post system: The inability to act on an ex-post notification may weaken enforcement on merger deals that presage competition restraint from the outset.
  • Unclear thresholds: Notification thresholds are linked to the potential competitive effect (monopoly, dominance, substantial lessening of competition), requiring complex analysis before notification and creating uncertainty. Clearer, objective criteria (such as turnover, potentially with a local nexus) are recommended.
  • Possibly high thresholds: The relatively low number of ex-ante filings (only 12 from 2017 to 2023) suggests current thresholds might be too high, potentially allowing anticompetitive deals to escape review.
  • Substantive test: The assessment appears focused on market structure (creation of dominance) rather than a broader “substantial lessening of competition” test used in many jurisdictions.
  • Procedure: Lack of third-party participation rights, potentially short review timelines for complex cases, and limited transparency regarding decisions are concerns.

Principal OECD Recommendations

The OECD Peer Review provides numerous recommendations, including:

  • Scope: Apply competition law consistently to SOEs engaged in economic activities and clarify jurisdiction in regulated sectors. Ensure extraterritorial application.
  • Resources and structure: Increase the TCCT budget and enforcement members of staff. Reconsider the role of external inquiry subcommittees.
  • Transparency and fairness: Publish decisions consisting of facts, legal basis, and penalties while protecting legitimate confidentiality. Improve procedural rules and rights of defense.
  • Enforcement: Empower the TCCT to impose administrative sanctions against hardcore cartels and abuse of dominance. Consider hardcore cartels inherently illegal. Clarify bid-rigging jurisdiction. Focus assessment of abuse of dominance on competitive impact. Introduce leniency/whistleblower programs.
  • Merger control: Streamline the regime (potentially removing the ex-post system or giving the TCCT powers within it). Adopt clear, objective notification thresholds, potentially lower them, and add a local nexus. Allow concerned parties to be involved in each stage of review and third-party input. Introduce a simplified procedure for a transaction that does not cause significant competition concerns (e.g., no horizontal overlaps or vertical relationships between the concerned parties, meeting criteria for combined market shares).

While Thailand made strides in the application and enforcement of competition law upon the enactment of the 2017 TCA, the OECD Peer Review underlines significant challenges that need to be addressed. An implementation of the OECD’s recommendations will be crucial for fostering a truly competitive environment that benefits businesses and consumers alike. For businesses having an operation in Thailand regardless of having a physical presence, understanding these ongoing developments and potential reforms is vital for navigating the competition law landscape effectively.

Related Professionals

Practices

Antitrust and Competition

Customs and International Trade

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 18, 2023
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins have prepared the Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand sections of the recently released Global Merger Notification Guide from Lex Mundi. The guide provides answers to key questions related to the merger notification requirements in jurisdictions of Lex Mundi member firms in 57 jurisdictions around the world. Each country-specific section contains in-depth information on the jurisdiction’s legal framework governing merger notifications, addressing the following questions and topics: Regulatory agency for merger notifications Transactions subject to national rules Timeline for filing merger notifications Merger review process Sanctions for not fulfilling merger notification requirements Remedial options for addressing the regulator’s competition concerns Current regulatory outlook and other notable information The guide draws on the expertise of Lex Mundi member firms from around the world. Its innovative format allows users to compare current information from multiple jurisdictions in a side-by-side, customizable report. To browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare regulatory guidance on merger notification requirements across multiple jurisdictions, please visit the Lex Mundi website.
Read More
August 25, 2023
Michael Ramirez, a counsel in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution department, has contributed an article to a series on contractual terms in Asia from the Asian Business Law Institute. Previous articles in the series have looked at administrative and tax requirements and contract breach and remedy under Thai law. The article gives an overview of how extracontractual liabilities are treated under Thai law. It addresses issues related to contract negotiations, no-reliance clauses, entire agreement clauses, and concurrent liability. ABLI, which is based in Singapore, conducts legal research and dissemination in order to provide knowledge, guidance, and recommendations surrounding development of legal systems in Asia. The full article on extracontractual liabilities is available as a PDF through the button below.
Read More
August 23, 2023
Self-reporting of customs violations in Thailand is normally carried out at the ports. However, in 2020, the Customs Department launched a campaign called the One Stop Service Program (OSSP) for business operators to self-report issues relating to unpaid customs duty from a central location in Bangkok. The current extension of the OSSP, which has been extended several times over the past few years, is due to expire on September 30, 2026, although a further extension seems likely. The OSSP offers a number of benefits. As noted above, settlement of unpaid duties can be done centrally in Bangkok even though the customs clearance itself is performed at Thai ports. Crucially, the fine for unpaid duty can be waived or reduced, and there is no late-payment penalty, which would normally amount to 20% of the unpaid duty if there is an official assessment and the duty is not paid within 30 days. The surcharge is reduced from 1% to 0.25%–0.75% per month on the unpaid duty. Nevertheless, any value-added tax (VAT), VAT surcharge, and VAT penalty on the unpaid duty still apply. To participate in the OSSP, the following conditions must be met: The offense must be considered a false declaration charge (Section 202 of the Customs Act), such as one involving value, price, tariff code, tariff rate, privileges, or other similar issues. The business operator must have committed the offense without intending to evade duty or restrictions. The goods must not be prohibited or infringe intellectual property. The declarations must not be under investigation by any authority in Thailand. Applications to participate in the OSSP can be submitted to the Post-Clearance Audit Division of the Customs Department, and applicants must provide the necessary documentation, such as customs declaration forms, invoices, purchase orders, sales contracts, and other payment documents. The officers
Read More
August 23, 2023
Laos has expanded its registration requirements for importers and exporters by mandating additional registration and financial procedures. Bank of Lao PDR (BOL) Decision No. 677, which was issued on July 24, 2023, requires importers and exporters to register with the BOL and to open a dedicated commercial bank account for their import-export business activities. These requirements are in addition to the May 2023 stipulation ordering importers and exporters to register with the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC). Registration and Account Opening After registering with the MOIC and receiving their MOIC registration certificate, importers and exporters have 10 days to register with the BOL. Within five working days of receiving a complete application, the BOL will issue a registration notification, after which the importer or exporter has 10 days to present its BOL registration certificate and the required supporting documents to a commercial bank for opening the specified bank account. Banking Requirements and Supporting Documents Payment for goods and services made or received from abroad by importers and exporters must take place via electronic wire transfer via the dedicated bank account opened specifically for import-export activities. The importer must provide the commercial bank with various required documents as evidence for each transaction. Likewise, exporters’ receipt of payment from abroad via bank transfer must take place using the bank account opened for import-export activities within the timeline specified in the sale-purchase agreement, but not exceeding 180 days from the export date. After receiving payment from abroad, the exporter must provide copies of various payment-related documents to the commercial bank. Exporters that wish to use any of this income to repay a loan must submit an application and supporting documents to the BOL for approval. The BOL will decide on the application within 10 working days of receiving the complete application
Read More