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

October 1, 2025

Precautions for Directors of IPO Candidates and Listed Companies in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates

In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage.

Key Legal Risks

The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment.

In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment.

Director and Executive Qualifications

Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in making false statements or concealing material information can immediately call into question their suitability to serve, and may hold other consequences, as noted above. However, grounds for disqualification do not extend to misstatements or omissions in IPO filings, regardless of final court judgment. Companies should be aware of these important distinctions and not assume that all disclosure violations are treated the same under the law.

Materiality Assessment

Information should be considered material if a reasonable investor would regard it as important, especially if it could influence the price or value of securities. Companies should carefully assess both the likelihood and potential impact of events, avoid selective disclosure, and seek expert advice when necessary to ensure a thorough and diligent process.

Ensuring Compliance

Accurate disclosure and strong governance are essential at every stage. Failure to disclose material information or making false statements can result in criminal liability, regulatory sanctions, and disqualification of directors. Proactive controls and transparent communication help reduce risk and support market integrity.

Boards, executives, and advisors should ensure that all disclosures are accurate, complete, and timely. Robust internal controls and clear documentation are essential to support compliance. Companies should also prepare contingency plans for leadership changes in the event of regulatory action, and maintain transparent communication with investors and stakeholders regarding regulatory matters and the company’s responses.

Related Professionals

Practices

Capital Markets

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 3, 2025
Thailand has proposed amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999) as the country steps up its efforts to combat economic crimes and corruption. One of the primary objectives of the amendments is to enhance the effectiveness of measures curbing the use of nominees to help foreign nationals operate restricted or prohibited businesses in violation of the law. If these proposed updates are implemented, they will substantially strengthen existing legislation related to the use of nominees and bribing government officials, including officials of foreign governments and international organizations. These offenses would be treated as predicate violations under the amended legislation. The draft amendments are currently open for a public comment period, which is set to conclude on April 25, 2025. Highlights of the proposed amendments are detailed below. Predicate Offenses The draft amendments propose adding the concept of a “predicate offense” covering the following: Bribery: Giving, offering, or promising to give assets or benefits to Thai or foreign public officials, or officials of international organizations. Acting as a nominee: Assisting, supporting, or engaging in the business operations of a foreign national who is not permitted to operate that business; jointly operating a business with a foreign national under the guise that it is solely owned by the Thai national; or holding shares on behalf of a foreign national in a partnership, limited company, or any other legal entity to help the foreign national conduct business without the permits required under the Foreign Business Act. Under the draft amendments, Thai individuals or juristic persons who have agreed to take any of these actions, as well as foreign nationals who allow such assistance in their business operations, will be liable for committing a predicate offense under the Anti-Money Laundering Act. The draft proposes a prescription period of 15 years from
Read More
March 21, 2025
Vietnam’s Law on Securities of 2019 was one of several laws amended (“Amended Securities Law”) under the wide-ranging Law No. 56/2024/QH15 passed by the National Assembly on November 29, 2024. The amendments came into force on January 1, 2025, with certain provisions related to professional securities investors and the eligibility criteria for public companies becoming effective on January 1, 2026. Below are some of the key points of the Amended Securities Law. Changes to Professional Securities Investors Professional securities investors (PSIs) are investors who have adequate financial capacity or securities qualifications and can participate in private placements and private funds, among other investment activities. Under the Amended Securities Law, foreign investors, including individuals and organizations, are now automatically classified as PSIs, without having to meet any requirements regarding financial capacity. This loosening of requirements is expected to attract more foreign investment. However, from January 1, 2026, individual PSIs will only be able to purchase, trade, and transfer privately placed corporate bonds that: (i) have been given credit ratings and are secured by collateral, or (ii) have been given credit ratings and covered by payment guarantees from credit institutions. Meanwhile, institutional PSIs will not be bound by these restrictions relating to privately placed corporate bonds. Protecting Shareholders in Private Securities Issuance The Amended Securities Law introduces additional conditions for private issuance of shares, convertible bonds, and warrant-linked bonds by public companies, and revises the required contents in the issuance plans from “criteria and number of investors” to “number of shares, offering price, or principles for determining the offering price.” This change promotes shareholder supervision and protects minority shareholders from overly powerful boards of directors. Expanded Powers of SSC The Amended Securities Law grants the State Securities Commission (SSC) new powers to suspend and cancel private placements of securities and adds
Read More
March 21, 2025
Thailand is continuing on its path toward comprehensive legislation to address climate change. In November 2024, the country’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) launched a public hearing on a new draft Climate Change Act following revisions made after an earlier hearing on a previous draft of the act. The revised version strengthens Thailand’s climate policy framework by introducing the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), modeled after the EU’s system of the same name. The new draft also restructures the planned Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and enhances carbon-tax provisions. These initiatives aim to minimize carbon leakage, promote fair competition for domestic industries, and encourage lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As of March 2025, the Department of Climate Change and Environment, under the MNRE, is awaiting the Ministry of Finance’s input on the draft act’s establishment of the Climate Fund, a fund to support business innovation in responding to climate change. After incorporating this feedback, the department will submit the refined draft for cabinet approval, expected in 2025. The legislation will then undergo Council of State review, with implementation expected in 2026. Key Provisions The draft Climate Change Act contains a number of provisions that will affect businesses. Some of the most relevant are discussed below. Mandatory ETS The ETS is a mandatory mechanism designed to control GHG emissions by setting emissions caps for designated industries in alignment with national targets. Under this system, businesses receive emissions allowances allocated through free allocation or auctions. This scheme incentivizes emissions reductions by allowing businesses that emit less than their allocated allowances to sell their surplus allowances. The specific business sectors covered by the ETS have not yet been identified in the draft act, as details are expected to be in subordinate legislation. However, it is anticipated that the sectors will align
Read More
March 19, 2025
On January 1, 2025, the Department of Business Development (DBD) in Thailand’s Ministry of Commerce implemented new stringent corporate registration screening measures in collaboration with several other government agencies to prevent entities from opening corporate mule accounts to commit criminal activities in Thailand. The DBD’s Order of the Office of Central Company and Partnership Registration No. 3/2024 stipulates a new method for registering the establishment of partnerships and limited companies for people who have been involved in underlying crimes or who are owners of bank accounts that are being used for underlying crime, as per the notification of the Anti-Online Scam Operation Center (AOC) to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) and the collated AMLO list of such persons. The order establishes the following key requirements: Managing partners and directors of partnerships and limited companies, respectively, whose names have been listed by the AMLO as a person who is involved in an underlying offense, or as the owner of a bank account being used for the underlying offense, must appear before the registrar in person. The concerned persons cited on the AMLO list must provide valid documentation of their identity to the DBD registrar (e.g., national identification card, government official identification card, government or state enterprise employee identification card, alien identification card, passport, document used in lieu of a travel document, or other similar documents with photo identification). This collaboration between the DBD and various relevant government agencies aims to eradicate the problem of fraudsters using mule accounts set up under legally established entities to deceive the public. It also seeks to enhance checks and screening of corporate mule accounts that are used to carry out criminal activities such as money laundering or cybercrime. These actions are part of the Thai government’s broader policy to suppress economic crimes. For more
Read More