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​ 

October 31, 2022
On October 21, 2022, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) added Myanmar to the list of high-risk jurisdictions having significant deficiencies to counter money laundering, terrorist financing, and financing of proliferation. The FATF is an international financial watchdog that aims to impede global money laundering and terrorist financing. It is a policymaking body that monitors implementation of FATF Recommendations and FATF Standards and is not binding as a supervisory authority for financial institutions. Myanmar will remain on the list of countries subject to a call for action until the country has implemented an action plan that: demonstrates an improved understanding of money laundering risks in key areas; demonstrates that onsite and offsite inspections are risk-based, and hundi (a type of informal remittance instrument for transferring money) operators are registered and supervised; demonstrates enhanced use of financial intelligence in law enforcement authorities’ investigations, and increasing operational analysis and dissemination by Myanmar’s Financial Intelligence Unit; ensures that money laundering is investigated and prosecuted in line with risks; demonstrates investigation of transnational money laundering cases with international cooperation; demonstrates an increase in the freezing, seizure, and confiscation of criminal proceeds, instrumentalities, and property of equivalent value; manages seized assets to preserve the value of seized goods until confiscation; and demonstrates implementation of targeted financial sanctions related to proliferation financing. Enhanced Customer Due Diligence Unlike other blacklisted countries, Myanmar is not applicable to countermeasures. Instead, the financial institutions of members and nonmember states of the FATF are urged to conduct “enhanced customer due diligence (CDD) measures” to mitigate the risk of money laundering, terrorist financing, and proliferation financing from Myanmar. Examples of these enhanced CDD measures to be applied to certain higher-risk activities include: Obtaining additional identifying information about the customer (available through public databases or internet sources) and regularly updating the identifying
Read More
October 31, 2022
After a long wait, Thailand’s Parliament approved the draft Act Amending the Civil and Commercial Code (the “Amended CCC”) on September 14, 2022. The Amended CCC (which had previously been approved by the cabinet in 2020) introduces changes to corporate governance and transactional rules, as well as processes for the merger of private limited companies. Corporate Governance and Transactional Rules The changes introduced by the Amended CCC in relation to corporate governance and transactional rules include the following: Currently, incorporation requires at least three promoters. Under the Amended CCC, only two promoters are necessary. Under the Amended CCC, a notice calling a general meeting of the shareholders is no longer required to be published in a local newspaper—the updated law only requires the notice to be sent to existing shareholders via post. However, if a company issues bearer certificates, a notice calling a general meeting of shareholders must still be published either in a local newspaper or via electronic media. To pass any resolution during a general meeting of shareholders, at least two shareholders, whether in person or via proxy, representing at least one-fourth of the capital of the company, must be present. Distribution of dividends must be completed within one month of a shareholders’ meeting or the directors passing a resolution on dividend payment. A company may be dissolved by the court if, among other circumstances, the number of shareholders decreases to one, or there are other reasons that the company can no longer exist. Merger The current Civil and Commercial Code only recognizes the concept of “amalgamation” of companies (i.e., the formation of a new company by amalgamation of at least two companies, resulting in the dissolution of the amalgamating companies). It is not possible for one of the amalgamating companies to be a surviving entity. In
Read More
October 19, 2022
The Factory Act B.E. 2535 (1992) is one of the most important laws regulating manufacturing businesses in Thailand. It applies to businesses either with machinery of 50 horsepower or more in total, or with a minimum of 50 workers in a facility that conducts “factory work” as defined under related ministerial regulations. The act was recently amended to extend the period of validity for factory licenses and to make other miscellaneous changes that facilitate business. However, the act’s criminal liabilities were left unchanged, and they remain a vital tool for the authorities to exert control over relevant standards and prosecute violations. Both fines and imprisonment are available as sanctions under the law. Examples of common violations of the Factory Act and their potential penalties include: Setting up and operating a factory without acquiring a license: up to two years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to THB 200,000 (approx. USD 5,365), or both. Operating with noise level exceeding the standard set by the Ministry of Industry: a fine of up to THB 200,000. Not displaying a factory license in an open and easily visible location in the factory: a fine of up to THB 5,000 (approx. USD 134). Doing a test run of machinery prior to the start of the factory operations without notifying the authorities: a fine of up to THB 20,000. As factory activities are regulated in considerable detail, overlooking a minor change could potentially put the company at risk. The risk of violating the Factory Act increases when compliance is not a proactive policy—such as by instituting systems or safeguards to ensure adherence to the rules. Criminal Liability Violation of the Factory Act is especially a concern because criminal liability under the act is not limited to juristic persons (i.e., companies) but also applies to the director,
Read More
October 4, 2022
On August 31, 2022, the Government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 58/2022/ND-CP guiding the registration and management of operations of foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Vietnam (“Decree 58”). This decree will come into effect on November 1, 2022, replacing Decree No. 12/2012/ND-CP of the Government dated March 1, 2012, on the same matter (“Decree 12”). In general, the provisions under Decree 58 appear more detailed and stricter than those under Decree 12. In particular, there are two notable changes in Decree 58 in comparison with its predecessor: the definition of foreign NGO and the suspension and termination of a foreign NGO’s operation. New Definition of Foreign NGOs Under Decree 58, “foreign non-governmental organization” means a non-profit organization, social fund or private fund established under foreign laws; having legitimate capital sources from foreign countries; conducting development assistance and humanitarian aid activities not for profit or other purposes in Vietnam; and not receiving financial donations, calling for sponsorship, or raising funds from Vietnamese organizations and individuals. This definition has been narrowed in comparison to Decree 12, which, in addition to non-profit organizations, social funds, and private funds, also included “other social or non-profit organizations” as a category. Decree 58 further affirms that foreign NGOs must have capital sources from overseas and cannot receive funding from local sources. The last requirement had been a matter of concern in the past when foreign NGOs wanted to receive donations from Vietnamese entities. In practice, the prohibition of local funding had been known as an unwritten policy of the government; it is now officially recognized in Decree 58, and will prevent foreign NGOs from approaching local funding sources. More Specific Suspension and Termination Regulations Under Decree 12, there was no separation between the circumstances in which a foreign NGO’s operation would be suspended and those
Read More