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 26, 2015

Licensing Reform on the Way in Thailand

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

In Franz Kafka’s novel The Castle, the protagonist tries in vain to get in touch with a mysterious group of administrators who run a small village from a castle. The character is challenged to learn the constantly changing ways and customs of the castle’s imposing bureaucracy.

Governments the world over employ vast armies of bureaucrats to administer official business, which includes everything from granting marriage licenses to approving multibillion-dollar investment projects. Thailand is no exception. But a new law called the Licensing Facilitation Act is aimed at making the bureaucracy easier to navigate and help Thailand’s business competitiveness.

As its name implies, the Act seeks to make it easier for businesses and individuals to obtain official licenses and approvals from government agencies. To that end, it promotes two overarching principles: greater transparency and less administrative discretion.

Indeed, as with the bureaucracies of other countries, the licensing process within Thai government agencies is often opaque. The time required to obtain a license is also uncertain, and officials can arbitrarily seem to change their minds about what paperwork is needed.

All of this makes doing business more difficult—and increases opportunities for corruption, as exasperated applicants will do whatever it takes to get their license.

The Licensing Facilitation Act, which goes into effect on July 21, takes aim at these problems. It requires licensing authorities to prepare a “licensing manual.” The manual must contain all the rules, procedures, and conditions to obtain a license as well as when the license must be issued.

If a license application is complete according to the manual, an official cannot ask for more documents. In other words, the manual should bring welcome predictability to the license application process.

What is more, license applications can be submitted electronically instead of by paper if allowed by the manual. This can save applicants significant time and expense.

If the application has a defect or does not fulfill the requirements stated in the manual, the official must ask the applicant to remedy the application immediately. If this is not possible, the official must make a record of the defect and the period of time needed to fix it.

Importantly, the official must make a decision on the license as per the timeline in the manual. If the deadline is not complied with, the official must explain the delay to the applicant and the Public Sector Development Commission, a government body under the Prime Minister’s Office, every seven days until a decision is made.

If the official fails to explain the delay, he or she can be liable for damages. The law does not state how damages would be calculated or to whom the official would be liable.

Another key feature of the Act is the creation of a One Stop Service Centre. The cabinet has the authority to establish such a center to receive all applications under the laws related to licensing. The One Stop Service Centre would be its own government agency, with branch offices under different ministries and different provinces.

The One Stop Service Centre would accept applications, inform applicants of licensing rules, send applications to the relevant agency, and give recommendations to the cabinet on improving licensing rules and application requirements. It can greatly ease the burden on applicants, as people would not be required to visit various agencies to obtain multiple licenses needed for an investment project.

The Licensing Facilitation Act also contains oversight mechanisms—for example, if a licensing official does not grant a license due to dishonesty or negligence, the relevant authority can bring disciplinary action against that official. Further, the Public Sector Development Commission can inspect whether the licensing officials’ work flow and period of time for granting the license stated in the manual are compliant with “good governance” rules. These rules are not specifically defined in the Act.

Additionally, licensing authorities must review the laws that empower them to grant licenses every five years. The authorities must submit reports of their review to the cabinet for consideration.

The Licensing Facilitation Act applies to almost all government licensing procedures, with a few notable exceptions. Courts are exempt, as are natural resource and environmentally related licensing. Military licenses are also generally exempt from the law.

The Act has the potential to make obtaining official licenses and approvals much easier. And reducing officials’ discretion in the licensing process will help to stop opportunities for corruption. Successful implementation would not only enhance Thailand’s investment environment but also improve overall governance. A more transparent and less Kafkaesque bureaucracy would be a boon for Thailand.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 29, 2026
Vietnam’s education sector is entering a new regulatory era. On December 10, 2025, the National Assembly adopted a series of new and amended laws in the field of education, including the 2025 Law on Vocational Education, the 2025 Law on Higher Education, and the amended Law on Education No. 123/2025/QH15 (Amended Law on Education). These laws together took effect on January 1, 2026, marking a significant reform of Vietnam’s legal framework governing the education sector. The legislative package introduces a new lawmaking approach under which foundational and principle-based provisions are codified in the Amended Law on Education, while the Law on Higher Education and the Law on Vocational Education serve as specialized statutes providing supplementary, sector-specific regulatory detail tailored to their respective subsectors. The Amended Law on Education fundamentally restructures how educational institutions are established, governed, and licensed, with direct implications for private investors, foreign-invested entities, and education service providers operating in Vietnam. Below are several highlights of the key changes under the amended law, especially in the private sector, that stakeholders should understand: Change in the National Education System In addition to primary education, lower secondary (junior high school) education is now compulsory in Vietnam. Accordingly, diplomas are no longer awarded upon completion of lower secondary school but only for upper education levels. The national education system is also expanded through the introduction of vocational high school as a new level of vocational education. Such reform creates additional learning pathways that not only enable learners to pursue both further education and participate in the labor market, but also better align education and training with socioeconomic development needs. New Hurdle for Joint Investors: Mandatory Corporate Entity Requirement Where two or more investors jointly establish an education institution, the investors are no longer permitted to directly establish such an institution.
April 28, 2026
Thailand’s Anti-Corruption Cooperation Committee has issued a major update to the anticorruption standards required for private entities engaging in high-value state projects. The update, titled “Announcement re: Procurement Limits and Minimum Anticorruption Standards (No. 2),” replaces and amends key provisions of the original announcement dated September 25, 2024. Published in the Government Gazette on April 10, 2026, the new rules take effect on May 10, 2026, and apply to projects valued at more than THB 300 million (approximately USD 9.3 million). The key amendments to the anticorruption standards are detailed below. Expanded Definition of Conflict of Interest The 2026 regulation significantly broadens the scope of what constitutes a conflict of interest compared to the 2024 version, which focused primarily on basic kinship and business ties. Under the new rules, a conflict of interest includes using one’s position or authority to seek benefits for oneself, a group, close associates, or business, including through business relationships, kinship ties, or relationships with spouses or individuals living together as partners without marriage registration. The 2026 announcement also introduces specific examples that were largely absent from the 2024 text, such as holding shares in similar businesses that submit proposals for the same project, or submitting proposals for projects in which a relative, spouse, or unregistered partner is an “involved party” in that procurement. Continuous Compliance: The “Final Payment” Rule Under the 2024 rules, the coverage period for anticorruption policies was less strictly defined. The new regulation mandates a continuous timeline: policies or certifications must remain effective from the date of bid submission until the contractor receives the final payment installment under the contract. If a certification or policy is set to expire before the final payment, the contractor must submit a new self-audit form and supporting evidence to the state agency before the original
April 22, 2026
A new decree in Vietnam brings significant implementation clarity to the country’s existing extended producer responsibility (EPR) legal framework. An EPR mechanism was first codified in Vietnam in the 2020 Law on Environmental Protection amid ongoing challenges surrounding the collection and treatment of product and packaging waste. The mechanism was progressively detailed through Decree No. 08/2022/ND‑CP and its successive amendments, but the regulatory framework remained insufficiently developed, notably in terms of support mechanisms for waste collection, recycling, and treatment. The newly launched regulations in Decree No. 110/2026/ND-CP (Decree 110), issued on April 1, 2026, and taking effect on May 25, 2026, stipulate fully and clearly the responsibility of manufacturers and importers to recycle products and packaging and to treat waste. Some key provisions of Decree 110 for manufacturers, importers, and related stakeholders are presented below. Subjects of EPR The Law on Environmental Protection assigns responsibility to manufacturers and importers for product and packaging recycling (under Article 54) or waste collection and treatment (under Article 55), depending on the type of products and packaging they produce or import. Decree 110 elaborates on these EPR provisions by specifying the responsible entities and listing out the types of products and packaging subject to recycling and waste treatment responsibilities. Decree 110 clarifies the responsible entities in special cases, such as when products under the same brand are made by multiple manufacturers, when there is a contract manufacturing or entrusted import relationship, and when the manufacturer or importer is part of a corporate group. Notably, exemptions may be applied in some scenarios, such as for manufacturers and importers of products and packaging exclusively for export, temporary import and re-export, or research and testing purposes, as well as for entities with annual revenue from related products not exceeding VND 30 billion. Recycling Responsibilities Decree 110
April 15, 2026
On March 31, 2026, Vietnam’s government issued Decree 102/2026/ND-CP (Decree 102), which amends Decree 75/2019/ND-CP on administrative sanctions for competition law violations (Decree 75). Effective from May 20, 2026, the new decree introduces a number of significant changes aimed at strengthening enforcement, revising penalty structures, and broadening the range of remedial measures, primarily for violations related to economic concentration. Revised Penalties for Economic Concentration Violations Decree 102 significantly revises the penalties for violations related to economic concentration. Failure to notify an economic concentration; implementing an economic concentration before clearance Under the new framework, Articles 14 and 15 of Decree 75 have been amended to impose a range of monetary fines, rather than relying solely on percentage‑based penalties as under the previous regime, for violations involving the failure to notify an economic concentration or the implementation of an economic concentration prior to clearance. The fines range from VND 500 million to VND 1 billion for each enterprise participating in a concentration with combined assets, revenues, or purchase value below VND 3,000 billion in the preceding fiscal year, capped at 5% of the violating enterprise’s total turnover in the relevant market. For concentrations meeting or exceeding the VND 3,000 billion threshold across those same metrics, the fines increase to VND 1 billion to VND 2 billion per enterprise, also subject to the 5% cap. These differentiated thresholds allow penalties to better reflect the size of the transaction and its potential competitive impact. Non-compliance with conditional approvals Enterprises that do not implement or only partially implement the conditions specified in a conditional economic concentration approval decision face fines ranging from 1% to 3% of total turnover in the relevant market during the fiscal year preceding the violation. Decree 102 also adds a new remedial measure requiring enterprises to fully implement all conditions