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

January 14, 2021

New Digital Asset Business Requirements for Businesses in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates

On November 26, 2020, the Notification of the Ministry of Finance Re: Addition to Other Business Relating to Digital Assets B.E. 2563 (2020) (the Digital Asset Business Notification) and the Notification of the Ministry of Finance Re: Licensing of Digital Asset Business No. 2 B.E. 2563 (2020) (the Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification) were published in the Thai Government Gazette.

Additional Digital Asset Businesses

The new Digital Assets Business Notification adds two new categories of digital assets business to the list prescribed in the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018).

  • Digital Asset Fund Manager is defined as a person who manages funds from digital assets for another person for benefits, or holds themselves out to the general public as being ready to do so, in the ordinary course of business. It does not include the management of digital assets as prescribed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
  • Digital Asset Advisory Service is defined as a person who provides consultations to other people, directly or indirectly, regarding the value of digital assets; the suitability of investment in digital assets; or the buying, selling, or exchanging of any digital assets in the ordinary course of business in return for service fees or other compensation. However, this does not include consultations as a part of or relating to a digital asset exchange, digital asset broker, digital asset dealer, digital asset fund manager, or other personal consultation as prescribed by the SEC.

Additional Digital Asset Licensing Requirements

The Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification amends the definition of “License Applicant” to include cryptocurrency exchanges, digital token exchanges, cryptocurrency brokers, digital token brokers, cryptocurrency dealers, digital token dealers, cryptocurrency fund managers, digital token fund managers, cryptocurrency advisory services, and digital token advisory services.

Additional requirements for granting licenses have also been added in the new Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification, including:

  • the licensee must never have been denied a license or had a license revoked in the last six months from the date of the application submission;
  • the licensee’s application must not be a replacement of a previous application that has been withdraw by the licensee; and,
  • the licensee must not currently be under any legal proceedings for any violation of law.

The digital assets business must commence within 180 days after receiving licensing approval.

Digital Asset Fund Managers and Digital Asset Advisory Services already in operation are required to apply for a license from the SEC within 90 days after this Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification comes into force (i.e. by February 25, 2021). Once an application has been filed with the SEC, the applicant is allowed to continue operating their business until the SEC issues an order to decline the application.

The Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification also updates the application fees.

For more details on these notifications, or on any aspect of Thai law relating to digital assets or currencies, please contact Charuwan Charoonchitsathian at [email protected], Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected] or Teelada Rujirawanichtep at [email protected].

 

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 1, 2025
Now halfway through 2025, Thailand continues to advance in the realm of data privacy, with the ambitious goal of achieving zero data breaches. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC), an independent government body established by the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), is taking a more proactive approach, having published several rulings and orders to enhance data protection measures and clarify compliance expectations for businesses. Here is a look back at Thailand’s data privacy developments in the first half of the year. Strengthening Law Enforcement and New Guidance for Compliance Enforcement of existing data protection laws and regulations has taken a step forward this year. Some of the specific initiatives include: Increased enforcement by the PDPC. A key trend to watch from the first half of 2025 is the PDPC’s active enforcement of the PDPA as it intensifies oversight through compliance orders and public warnings against noncompliant organizations while ramping up efforts to prevent and halt the illegal trading of personal data by actively monitoring emerging societal issues. Call center scams and cyber fraud control. Thailand published an amendment to the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes to strengthen measures against technological crimes, particularly targeting call center scams and cyber fraud. Orders from the Expert Committee. Several orders issued by the Expert Committee under the PDPA were announced in the first half of this year. These include directives for data controllers to take corrective actions to comply with the PDPA, as well as initiatives to raise awareness of data privacy within organizations, reflecting the regulator’s focus on promoting organizational awareness and compliance. A guideline report summarizing the Expert Committee’s decisions and orders was also published to serve as a reference for compliance. Public issue monitoring. The PDPC has been taking a more proactive approach
Read More
June 27, 2025
Three American giants are actively protecting their intellectual property rights against generative AI, as two legal battles commence on both sides of the Atlantic. In the UK, Seattle-based media company Getty Images accuses UK-based Stability AI of multiple IP infringements. In the US, The Walt Disney Company and Universal Studios are teaming up against Midjourney, an AI startup, with their main ground being copyright infringement. Both cases are centered around questions legal minds have been posing since the introduction of generative AI: Is the output of generative AI an infringement? And who is ultimately responsible for the output, the platform or the user? Getty Images v. Stability AI Getty initially filed a claim in the High Court in 2023, which resulted in Stability applying for reverse summary judgment on the grounds that Getty had no real prospect of success, arguing that their operations took place outside the UK. However, the High Court judge hearing the case decided that the claims brought by Getty did have a real prospect of succeeding in court. Despite this, Stability saw a small victory when the court ruled that the representative action brought by Getty would not succeed due to the difficulties in identifying who qualified for the class. The proposed class was comprised of 50,000 rightsholders who alleged their rights were also infringed. Stability was successful in arguing that identifying these individuals would be challenging due to the unclear definition of the class. This current trial is centered around four main grounds: Copyright infringement. Getty accuses Stability of using content that Getty owns or has an exclusive license for when training their model, Stable Diffusion, resulting in the generated output containing substantial parts of that content. Getty is also alleging secondary copyright infringement, arguing that Stability is importing an article into the UK
Read More
June 26, 2025
Vietnam’s new Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) was passed by the National Assembly on June 26, 2025, and will enter into force on January 1, 2026. The PDPL introduces several new concepts, exemptions, and obligations in comparison with the current Decree No. 13/2023/ND-CP on personal data protection (PDPD), while other contents remain essentially the same. The relationship between the PDPD and the PDPL has not been clearly addressed; however, it is expected that the government will issue a new decree providing necessary guidance on certain requirements under the PDPL, and the PDPD will remain in effect until it is replaced by this new decree. Some key points of the new PDPL include the following: Personal data will be further defined by lists of basic personal data and sensitive personal data to be issued by the government. The consent-centric approach of the PDPD remains in place, along with additional exemptions for certain data processing activities. The requirements for the data processing impact assessment (DPIA) and transfer impact assessment (TIA) remain unchanged. However, there are new exemptions for the TIA, including for the processing and storing in the cloud of employee data, and when the data subject is the person sending its own data outside of Vietnam. Consent obtained under the PDPD remains valid under the PDPL. DPIAs and TIAs submitted under the PDPD are valid under the PDPL but may need to be updated to be in line with the requirements of the PDPL. Administrative fines depend on the type of violation. The fine for sale and purchase of personal data will be 10 times the revenue from the sale or VND 3 billion (about USD 115,000), whichever is higher. The fine for cross-border transfer violations is 5% of the violator’s revenue of the preceding year or VND 3 billion,
Read More
June 25, 2025
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is no longer a distant innovation confined to science fiction and research labs; it has become an integral part of daily business operations worldwide. Employees across industries are adopting GenAI tools at a remarkable pace—including in Southeast Asia, where a tech-savvy workforce and widespread internet and mobile access have driven early adoption. The reality facing organizations today is clear: employees are integrating GenAI into their daily work, often without official approval or clear policies. This phenomenon, often called “Bring Your Own AI,” comes out of a disconnect between organizational governance and employee behavior and reveals the urgent need for proactive AI policies and oversight. For business leaders and legal teams, GenAI is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, these tools can deliver real business value and boost efficiency. On the other, the unsanctioned and unmonitored use of GenAI introduces substantial legal risks, such as data privacy violations, confidentiality breaches, and intellectual property issues. The widespread adoption of GenAI tools by employees, regardless of official organizational stance or guidelines, demonstrates that prohibition is neither practical nor effective. A more strategic approach involves establishing comprehensive governance policies that encourage responsible AI use while managing the risks. Organizations that take the lead in developing GenAI governance policies are better positioned to benefit from its transformative potential. The question isn’t whether GenAI will change how we work, but how quickly organizations can put the right safeguards in place to manage this change successfully. Risks of GenAI Use The use of GenAI in business operations, whether sanctioned or not, exposes organizations to a unique set of risks. The following are particularly relevant: Data security and confidentiality: General GenAI tools in the market may transmit data to external servers, retain conversation histories, and use inputs for model training.
Read More