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

March 5, 2026

Thai SEC Heightens Enforcement Against Cross-Border Digital Asset Platforms

Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities.

Criminal Complaint

On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license.

According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform.

The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts.

Platform Blocking

The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public access to the global platform under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technology Crime (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025). Access is expected to be restricted beginning March 22, 2026. The SEC has cautioned current users in Thailand to take appropriate steps regarding their digital assets held on the platform before the blocking date and reiterated its warning against using the services of unlicensed digital asset operators.

Key Takeaway

This enforcement action reflects the SEC’s heightened scrutiny of unlicensed offshore digital asset platforms and demonstrates that such platforms may not rely on local licensed entities to offer cross-border trading services targeting Thai users.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 18, 2023
On April 17, 2023, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 13/2023/ND on the Protection of Personal Data (“PDPD”), following extensive public consultations and multiple rounds of review since the first release of its draft version in February 2021. This is a long-awaited legal instrument which is designed to be the very first comprehensive regulation on the protection of personal data in Vietnam. The PDPD is set to take effect on July 1, 2023, without any transitional period. All Vietnamese and foreign organizations and individuals located in Vietnam and/or directly participating in or related to personal data processing activities in Vietnam must comply with the PDPD. As expected, the PDPD sets out significantly new requirements on the processing of personal data. The most critical provisions include: Eight principles for the processing of personal data: (i) lawfulness, (ii) transparency, (iii) purpose limitation, (iv) data minimization, (v) accuracy, (vi) integrity, confidentiality, and security, (iv) storage limitation, and (viii) accountability (Article 3). Critical new definitions and concepts, notably including personal data (Article 2.1); basic personal data (Article 2.3); sensitive data (Article 2.4); data subject (Article 2.6); data controller (Article 2.9); data processor (Article 2.10); parties controlling and processing personal data (Article 2.11); third parties (Article 2.12); and cross-border transfer of personal data (Article 2.14). Eleven data subject rights, including the right to know; right to consent; right to access; right to withdraw consent; right to delete data; right to restrict data processing; right to request the provision of data; right to object to data processing; right to complain, denounce and initiate lawsuits; right to claim compensation for damage; and right to self-defense (Article 9). Specific responsibilities of data controllers (Article 38), data processors (Article 39) and third parties (Article 41). Specific requirements in the exercise of data subject rights (Articles 14-16). Rules on
April 17, 2023
Since the issuance last October of Decree No. 71/2022/ND-CP (“Decree 71”), the differentiation of film vs. non-film content has become increasingly important for pay-TV service providers in Vietnam, because they are subject to completely different licensing requirements. With the effectiveness of Decree 71 on January 1, 2023, overseas providers of over-the-top (OTT) pay-TV services, including video on demand (VOD) content, to Vietnamese users are subject to licensing requirements and the establishment of a local presence in Vietnam. Meanwhile, the new Cinema Law promulgated on June 15, 2022, and its guiding Decree No. 131/2022/ND-CP dated December 31, 2022—both of which also took effect on January 1, 2023—do not impose any licensing requirements on film disseminators. Although there are ambiguities in Decree 71’s wording, the Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) and the Authority for Broadcasting and Electronic Information (ABEI) under the MIC have confirmed orally in a closed industry meeting, without written confirmation, that for VOD film-only content, OTT pay-TV service providers are exempted from the licensing requirements of Decree 71 and are instead subject to regulations of the Cinema Law. This is why film vs. non-film content has become critical in shaping the business models of overseas pay-TV service providers. In this article, we provide an overview of the current regulations and draft regulations with regard to the classification/rating of film content under the regulations of the Cinema Law and its sub-laws, and the classification/rating of non-film content under the regulations of Decree 71.   Film Classification/Rating Under the Cinema Law, “films” are defined to include feature films, documentaries, cartoons, and films of combined genres. The law explicitly provides that “films” do not include recorded products for disseminating news, art shows, video games, recorded products that show the activities of one or more people and describe events and situations,
March 30, 2023
Digital asset litigation is one of the most cutting-edge types of litigation in Thailand. There are factual, technical, regulatory, and legal challenges and hurdles for the parties to the dispute throughout all procedural stages. This is mainly because digital assets are different in nature from more conventional types of assets, as they are digitally created and used on a blockchain network. Legal Status The first issue to be aware of in approaching digital asset litigation is the legal status of digital assets. Under Thai law, there are two key terms concerning digital assets’ legal status: “thing” and “property.” Things are tangible objects, while property provides a much wider range of meaning. Property could be anything—including intangible objects that may be of value and able to be appropriated. It is fairly clear that digital assets are not a “thing” since they are not tangible. However, determining whether digital assets are “property” is even more complicated. Although digital assets are intangible objects, one might argue that, unlike fiat money, they do not have any inherent value but are rather conferred value based on certain people’s perspective. (For example, the Bank of Thailand expressed this opinion of bitcoin in 2014.) Some may even argue that digital assets cannot be possessed and therefore cannot be appropriated. According to these arguments, digital assets should not be regarded as a property either. Legal Grounds Determining whether digital assets are things, property, or something else altogether is crucial to any subsequent litigation. In Thailand, the party initiating the lawsuit (the plaintiff) generally has to state the relevant legal grounds for the complaint—that is, the different relevant legal provisions that the court is to apply to the case. These provisions of Thai laws mostly refer only to “things” or to “property,” not both. This often means that
March 20, 2023
Thailand has enacted new legislation to counter cybercrime and scams. The Royal Decree on Measures for Protection and Suppression of Technology Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Cybercrime Decree”) was published in the Government Gazette on March 16, 2023, and took effect the following day. The Cybercrime Decree provides a new legal tool to interrupt the money-laundering process and aims to crack down on cybercrime perpetrators and scammers by providing stronger legal measures applying to certain types of offenders that had not been sufficiently covered by existing laws. This new legislation grants victims the right to have commercial banks and online payment platforms freeze suspicious transactions and obligates these banks and platforms to comply with such requests. It further requires these banks and platforms—as well as other service providers—to share data for the prompt prevention and suppression of cybercrime. The key rights, duties, and offenses established by the Cybercrime Decree are detailed below. Freezing Transactions The Cybercrime Decree requires commercial banks and online payment platforms to temporarily freeze (for 72 hours) any related transactions of their account holders upon receipt of an alert from the account holder that he or she is the victim of cybercrime. Victims can report these illicit transactions by phone or electronic means. If by phone, the relevant bank or platform must document the call. The victim must file a police complaint about the illicit transaction within 72 hours of the freeze being made. A police inquiry officer will then notify the bank or platform about the complaint, and the transaction freeze must be maintained for seven days from the filing of the complaint with the police. The police will then determine whether it is necessary to keep the transaction frozen for longer than seven days. If the seven days lapse without a further order to freeze the