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

November 11, 2016

New Rehabilitation Regulations: Survival Tools for SMEs

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have grown rapidly in Thailand over the past ten years, creating millions of jobs and contributing to the Kingdom’s steady economic growth. According to the 2015 annual report of the Office of SMEs Promotion (OSMEP), there were approximately 2.7 million SMEs at the end of 2015, employing around 10 million people, particularly in the tourism, construction, and wholesale sectors.

This has prompted the government to issue numerous privileges that encourage entrepreneurs to start up their own businesses, such as special rates for loans and tax breaks. The latest privilege, issued under the Bankruptcy Act (No. 9) B.E. 2559 (2016) on May 24, 2016, offers SMEs the opportunity to rehabilitate and avoid bankruptcy in the face of short-term liquidity problems. This privilege is designed to protect popular SMEs which experience temporary liquidity problems and are unable to make repayments in the short-term.

Unlike previous rehabilitation regulations, which only allowed debtors of more than THB 10 million to file a request for reorganization to the court, the new Bankruptcy Act provides SMEs with the opportunity to enter rehabilitation if there are reasonable grounds and prospects for rehabilitating the business. This may prevent such SMEs from being declared bankrupt.

Requirements for Rehabilitation

The new Bankruptcy Act allows an SME to enter into the rehabilitation process regardless of whether it is a natural person, juristic body, partnership, or private limited company, provided that the SME is registered with OSMEP or another related government agency, in accordance with the SMEs Promotion Act B.E. 2543 (2000).

The new Bankruptcy Act lowers the minimum threshold of debt that an SME which is in no position to repay the debt must meet in order to be eligible to enter into the rehabilitation process. The thresholds vary, depending on the type of SME. Natural persons are required to have a definite amount of debt amounting to not less than THB 2 million. Juristic bodies, registered or unregistered ordinary partnerships, or limited liability partnerships must have a definite amount of debt of not less than THB 3 million. And private limited companies must have a definite amount of debt of not less than THB 3 million, but not more than THB 10 million.

Key Differences in the Rehabilitation Process for SMEs

Under the normal rehabilitation process, a plan preparer is appointed by the court to draft a rehabilitation plan. This plan must be approved by the creditor(s) and the court, and all of these processes will take place once the petition for rehabilitation has been accepted by the court. In contrast, for an SME to apply for rehabilitation, the SME or its creditor(s) must file a petition to rehabilitate to the Central Bankruptcy Court, together with a rehabilitation plan. This plan must be approved by the creditor(s) of at least two-thirds of the total amount of debt.

This presents some challenges to SMEs that want to enter into the rehabilitation process, as they need to organize the creditor meeting and persuade the majority of creditors to accept the plan, in order to complete the rehabilitation petition and submit the petition to the court. In contrast, under the normal rehabilitation process, the official receiver handles these processes by sending an official notice to every creditor, inviting them to attend the official creditor meeting.

For the rehabilitation of an SME, after the rehabilitation petition has been submitted to the court, a plan preparer is not appointed, and the plan cannot be amended, unlike the normal rehabilitation process. Thereafter, the court has sole discretion as to whether to accept the petition.

Automatic Stays

Much like the normal rehabilitation process, under the rehabilitation process for SMEs, an automatic stay would be applicable starting from the date the court accepts the SME rehabilitation petition until:

  • the expiration of the period of time stipulated under the rehabilitation plan;
  • the date the plan is successfully accomplished;
  • the date that the court dismissed the petition, disposed of the case, or repealed the order for the business rehabilitation; or
  • the business rehabilitation has been canceled.

As with automatic stays under the normal rehabilitation process, automatic stays under rehabilitation for SMEs prevent creditors from claiming or seizing the SME’s assets, and they also halt all ongoing seizures and auctioning of the SME’s assets.

Under the new Bankruptcy Act, the government is effectively offering entrepreneurs protection in the form of a safety net that allows them to survive temporary liquidity problems. Many business operators are expected to take advantage of this, and as a result, SMEs should continue to play an important part in Thailand’s economic growth.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 29, 2026
Is arbitration only as good as the arbitrator? Undoubtedly. Choosing an arbitrator is therefore one of the most pivotal decisions a party makes in the arbitration proceedings. In practice in Vietnam, many arbitration proceedings have been significantly prolonged because of multiple unsuccessful appointments arising from conflicts of interest, challenges by the opposing party, or subsequent unavailability. In other cases, additional expenses were incurred where appointed arbitrators were located far from the hearing venue or were unfamiliar with the arbitration language or applicable law. To preempt these issues and secure a more efficient and cost-effective appointment, this article proposes a practical, step-by-step approach to arbitrator selection. Step 1: Know Your Own Case At the outset, it is essential to develop a clear understanding of the dispute by addressing the following key considerations: Nature of the dispute: From which sector does it arise (e.g., construction, international trade, investment, banking and finance, technology, intellectual property)? Value and complexity: Is the dispute high or low in value? Does it involve multiple parties, multiple legal systems, or foreign elements? Is its crux related to multiple legal matters? Existing arbitration agreement: Does the agreement specify the seat, language, and governing law? If not, what would be appropriate considering the parties’ conduct and the applicable arbitration rules? Having clear answers to these questions in mind will help identify, from the outset, the core criteria for selecting an appropriate arbitrator. Step 2: Form Your Candidate Pool Based on the understanding developed in Step 1, a candidate pool should be formed through a structured and careful process: Researching Arbitrator Profiles At the initial stage, comprehensive research should be conducted via reliable sources to ensure both accuracy and diversity of candidates. Official sources, such as lists of arbitrators published by arbitral institutions, most notably the Vietnam International Arbitration Centre
Read More
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.
Read More
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
Read More
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
Read More