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 7, 2011

Procurement Contracts and Their Impact on Pharmaceutical Companies

PReMA Life

Concerns raised by the Thai pharmaceutical industry in recent years of alleged corrupt practices by employees of state hospitals, has led to the implementation of more stringent legislation to combat the problem of state funds seeping through a porous pharmaceutical procurement system.

Due to the fact that sales of pharmaceutical products to state hospitals by pharmaceutical companies have typically been conducted through procurement contracts, the existing system has long been open to possible abuse, which has stoked increasing concerns among legislators and administrators, both within the government and in state hospitals.

However, with the active enforcement of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the recent implementation of the UK Bribery Act, foreign pharmaceutical companies are finally delving deeper into the practices of their sales teams and demanding more transparency.

The main concern is that companies without a strong culture of compliance may not attempt to implement these stricter sales rules, which would result in an unbalanced market.

Notification on Procurement Contracts

This objective of raising transparency in government and state agencies has led to the recent implementation of the Notification re: Rules and Procedures Concerning the Preparation and Disclosure of Revenue and Expenses Accounts of Projects in which Individuals or Juristic Entities Are Contractual Parties with Government Agencies (Notification), on August 11, 2011, by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). This notification arose as a direct result of the amendment of the Organic Act on Counter Corruption dated April 12, 2011.

The Notification, which will become effective on January 1, 2012, stipulates that private sector entities that enter into procurement contracts with government agencies will now be required to prepare, and electronically submit, annual revenue and expense accounts to the Revenue Department, as well as their Corporate Income Tax Return for juristic entities.

The Notification will significantly impact entities in the private sector that enter into government procurement contracts, including individuals, Thai companies, and foreign companies with a local presence. The definition of “government agencies” is quite broad and includes government hospitals such as Siriraj Hospital, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, and Bhumibol Adulyadej Hospital

One important factor introduced is that the threshold for reporting is set relatively low, as all government procurement contracts with a value of THB 500,000 or more will be subject to the disclosure requirement. Businesses will also be required to submit one revenue and expense account for each contract, and to retain supporting documents for at least five years.

The Notification also states that government agencies should set a condition requiring businesses that enter into procurement contracts to receive and make payment via a current account, with the exception of payments that do not exceed THB 30,000, which can be made in cash.

Government contracts executed before January 1, 2012, will not be subject to this new disclosure requirement. However, if any material amendments are made to such contracts after January 1, 2012, they will also be subject to the disclosure requirement.

Although failure to comply with the new disclosure requirement does not entail criminal penalties, the sanction imposed under the Notification is commercially severe: violators will be disqualified from entering into new procurement contracts with government agencies. In addition, failure to comply with the reporting requirement, or incorrect reporting, could result in scrutiny by the NACC, the Revenue Department, and other relevant government authorities.

The new reporting requirement will place a substantial burden on the private sector, because it requires a separate detailed report for each contract, and contract values exceeding the low threshold of THB 500,000 will subject entities to the reporting requirement.

Impact on Pharmaceutical Companies

Pharmaceutical companies frequently enter into procurement contracts with government agencies, as defined in the Notification. Since most of these procurement contracts exceed the threshold of THB 500,000, pharmaceutical companies will now be required to provide detailed information for each procurement contract. When pharmaceutical companies provide discounts or donations to hospitals, these are sometimes not officially part of the procurement contract. It is therefore questionable whether these items need to be disclosed under the Notification.

Nonetheless, foreign companies must carefully assess the legality of such discounts or donations in pharmaceutical procurement contracts and the impact of the Notification on these aspects of procurement.

The approach adopted by the pharmaceutical company’s headquarters is also an important factor that must be taken into consideration. In any event, the company must ensure legality by implementing measures to lower the possible risk of action being taken by Thai regulators as well as foreign governments. In principle, the firm must at least ensure that a receipt is issued, the recipient is not an individual, and also verify that the money is used by the hospitals, etc.

The worldwide legal framework on corruption is changing, leading to more harmonized rules. However, the environment still remains a difficult one for companies to operate in, because some practices are strongly ingrained in some countries. Thus, despite the introduction of the new regulations in Thailand, the extent to which the new requirements will be implemented by the new government still remains uncertain.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 11, 2025
Thailand traditionally has had a reputation as a “crossroads” for numerous illegal activities and of the laundering of significant sums of tainted money. Member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)? No. Any Egmont members? Yes. Thailand’s Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) is a member of the Egmont Group. Regulation The relevant law, known as the Anti-Money Laundering Act (the Act), was passed in March 1999 with the aim of combating not only the drug trade but also other illicit activities, such as corruption, criminal fraud and prostitution. There have been a number of changes and updates to the Act, the most recent one in late 2015, in which the Act was amended to include: Additional predicate offences such as offences relating to human trafficking, online gambling and offences relating to unfair practices relating to derivatives and agricultural commodity futures. Broader scope of money laundering offence. Non-disclosure obligations to applicable financial institutions and reporting entities. Compulsory training to financial institutions and reporting entities’ employees responsible to monitor and ensure compliance with the Act. Retention period. Enhanced penalties Additionally, discussions did take place mooting further changes to the Act, set out in 2020 and 2021 drafts. Proposed changes included suggestions to expand the definitions of financial institutes, predicate offences and professions, as well as to impose greater reporting and due diligence responsibilities on companies subject to the Act. However, recent amendments to the Act in 2022 only included minor procedural and substantive changes that did not materially alter or expand the Act. The most notable amendments were changes to an injured party’s rights to claim damages caused by a predicate offence and the rights of beneficiaries claiming assets seized by the government in connection with a predicate offence. Financial intelligence unit Of the total number of transactions reported to AMLO annually,
August 1, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Vietnam chapter to Corporate Governance 2025, part of the International Comparative Legal Guides (ICLG) series published by Global Legal Group. This respected guide offers comprehensive, jurisdiction-specific overviews of corporate governance laws and practices around the world. Each jurisdictional chapter follows a clear Q&A format, providing practical insights into critical issues such as: Sources of corporate governance regulation Shareholders’ rights, powers, and responsibilities Structure and duties of management bodies Stakeholder involvement in governance Transparency and reporting requirements ESG and sustainability-related obligations Cybersecurity and technology-related disclosures The Vietnam chapter was authored by Tram Ngoc Bich Nguyen, Truc Thi Thanh Tran, Dung Thi Phuong Le, and Quang Minh Vu, members of Tilleke & Gibbins’ corporate and commercial team in Ho Chi Minh City. The authors provide detailed analysis of Vietnam’s corporate governance framework, including recent developments such as the 2025 amendments to the Law on Enterprises requiring disclosure of ultimate beneficial ownership and the increasing emphasis on sustainable business practices and responsible corporate conduct. The chapter also discusses practical considerations for foreign investors in Vietnam, such as overlapping signing authorities between key company officers, enforcement of shareholders’ agreements, and disclosure obligations related to ownership and management roles. The complete Vietnam chapter is available as a PDF below. The Vietnam chapter—and the full Corporate Governance 2025 guide—are also freely available on the ICLG website.
June 16, 2025
Thailand has amended its primary anticorruption law to provide robust new protections and direct assistance to whistleblowers. The Organic Act on Anti-Corruption (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025) was published in the Government Gazette on June 5, 2025, and came into force the following day. The amendment introduces a clear framework for safeguarding and supporting individuals who report graft. The amendment addresses a critical gap in the previous legislation by establishing formal mechanisms to protect and assist those who come forward with information. The key changes aim to shield whistleblowers from retaliatory legal and disciplinary actions, thereby encouraging more citizens to participate in exposing corruption without fear of reprisal. Key updates to the law are discussed below. Whistleblower Immunity The amendment clarifies and strengthens legal immunity by revising section 132 of Thailand’s original anticorruption law from 2018. Under the revised section, individuals who provide good-faith statements, information, evidence, or opinions to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) regarding offenses under its jurisdiction will be protected from civil, criminal, and disciplinary liability. This protection is explicitly extended to individuals who provide information to other state agencies tasked by the NACC to investigate corruption, such as the Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission or the whistleblower’s own supervisors. Protection and Assistance A new section added to the law establishes a clear and swift process for activating protections. When the NACC learns that a whistleblower is facing legal complaints, criminal charges, or disciplinary action due to their report, the commission must review the matter and decide on providing protection within 15 days. If the NACC determines that the whistleblower acted in good faith, its office is required to provide immediate assistance. Legal and Financial Support Another newly introduced section outlines a wide range of assistance measures the NACC office can provide in civil and criminal cases
June 6, 2025
As from July 1, 2025, as part of its ongoing efforts to digitalize and streamline the delivery of public services, the Vietnamese government will officially conduct administrative procedures, both online and offline, only via electronic identity (“e-ID”) accounts on the VNeID platform. In particular: Online administrative procedures carried out via the National Public Service Portal or via information systems for administrative procedures at the ministerial or provincial level are required to be implemented by using e-ID accounts only. When receiving dossiers, authorities will be required to check and verify the e-IDs of companies or individuals responsible for conducting administrative procedures. Further, it is worth noting that to complete the registration of an e-ID account for a company, the legal representative of the company must hold a level-2 e-ID account. Compliance Considerations Vietnam’s first regulation of e-ID accounts for individuals and organizations was issued in Decree No. 59/2022/ND-CP dated September 5, 2022, on electronic authentication and identification. This decree was subsequently replaced by Decree No. 69/2024/ND-CP dated June 25, 2024, which governs the same matters. Registration and operation of e-ID accounts are centralized through VNeID, a digital ID app developed by the National Population Data Center under the Ministry of Public Security of Vietnam. Although the registration of e-ID accounts for companies is not explicitly mandated by law, the absence of an e-ID account may hinder companies from completing administrative procedures, including licensing and reporting obligations. Such non-compliance could consequently result in administrative penalties. To mitigate unexpected non-compliance and administrative fines due to the lack of an e-ID account, companies should be well prepared for and implement the registration of a company e-ID account as soon as possible.