Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand chapter to the latest edition of the Global FinTech Guide published by Multilaw. The guide offers an overview of the legal and regulatory environment for financial technology across key jurisdictions worldwide. Prepared by leading experts from Multilaw member firms, the Global FinTech Guide explores how innovation is reshaping the financial sector and how governments and regulators are responding to emerging technologies such as digital payment services, cryptocurrencies, and online financial advisory platforms. The publication enables quick comparison of regulatory frameworks and provides detailed country-level insights for investors, startups, and established financial institutions engaging in FinTech activities. The Thailand chapter, authored by lawyers in Tilleke & Gibbins’ technology and financial services teams, outlines the country’s evolving regulatory landscape for fintech operations. It addresses the following topics: Payment services Asset and portfolio management Financial advisory and broking services (including robo-advisory and auto-trading) Trading platforms, social trading platforms, and signal following Crowdfunding, crowdinvesting, and crowdlending DLT and cryptocurrencies Loan services, factoring, loan broking, and finetrading Identification Online banking services Initial coin offerings (ICOs) and token sales Insurtech Regtech and compliance management Know-your-customer (KYC) requirements Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Vietnam chapter to the Global FinTech Guide. The full guide is available on the Multilaw website.

Attorneys in Tilleke & Gibbins’ regulatory affairs team have produced the Cannabis and Hemp Business Guide – Thailand, a primer on the rapidly developing cannabis industry in Thailand.

Thailand currently lacks a specific franchise act. Consequently, the legality of any franchise agreement is determined by its compliance with various existing laws, such as the Civil and Commercial Code, the Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) (as amended), and the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2530 (1997). Thailand is a freedom-to-contract jurisdiction. This allows for a high degree of flexibility and autonomy in contractual arrangements, provided that the terms do not violate any laws or public policy and do not fall under the scope of unfair contract terms. Given this, the requirement for fairness in franchise agreement terms often leads to uncertainty, but decisions from the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) can provide guidance on whether specific contentious terms are in fact fair.  One issue worth examining in this light is the inclusion of terms on nonrefundable franchise fees and strict purchasing conditions. Franchise Fee: Unfair to Refuse Refund? Nonrefundable franchise fees represent a significant upfront investment for franchisees, often becoming a point of contention if the franchise relationship deteriorates or the franchisor ceases operations. Their fairness and enforceability are frequently scrutinized by regulatory bodies like the TCCT, highlighting the critical balance between contractual freedom and franchisee protection. Faced with one such case, the TCCT considered whether it was unfair for the franchisor to refuse to refund the franchise fee after the franchisor ceased operations.  The franchisee had entered into a service agreement on August 2, 2021, and begun operating on October 9, 2021. However, by November 21, 2023, the franchisee was notified that the system would be shut down for maintenance, and by December 26, 2023, the franchisor announced the cessation of operations due to financial losses. The franchisee then requested a refund of the franchise fee. Unfortunately for the franchisee, the TCCT found that the franchisor’s

The Indonesian Food and Drug Administration (BPOM) has introduced more stringent oversight of health supplements containing probiotics with new guidelines that require clinical trials for certain products and expanded documentation standards. BPOM Regulation No. 17 of 2025 replaces the previous 2021 regulation and establishes a comprehensive framework for evaluating probiotic strains used in health supplements. Assessment Requirements The new regulation expands the scope of assessment to include not only categorization and documentation but also technical procedures, strain classification, and clinical trial requirements. Unlike the previous regulation, which provided general guidance, the updated framework creates a comprehensive system for evaluating both registered probiotic strains and new or combined strains. Manufacturers must now submit supporting documentation covering strain identification and functional characterization, safety, efficacy, and product quality. The previous regulation required documentation only on safety, efficacy, and quality. Clinical Trials One of the most significant changes is the requirement for clinical trials conducted in Indonesia for applications that include benefit claims other than maintaining digestive health, or where there are modifications to benefit claims. The regulation specifies that phase 1 trials must demonstrate safety, while phase 2 trials must validate efficacy using statistically valid methods such as double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies). In addition, phase 3 and phase 4 trials may be required, and postmarket surveillance data must be submitted. Technical Assessment Framework Annex 4, a newly introduced section, establishes technical procedures for assessing health supplements containing probiotics in Indonesia. This comprehensive framework outlines criteria for evaluating new probiotic strains, including strain identification, functional characterization, safety, efficacy, and product quality. The annex introduces a clear classification of claims for health supplement products containing probiotics: General claims(e.g., maintaining digestive health). Functional claims(e.g., normal biological function or activity in the body). Risk reduction claims(e.g., lowering disease risk). The regulation restricts use of the term