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 19, 2024

Thai SEC Proposes Changes to Takeover Rules

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has announced a public hearing on proposed amendments to takeover regulations under Thailand’s Security and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (and the regulations issued thereunder) that have the potential to reshape the country’s market for takeovers. The proposed changes, which have not yet been compiled in a formal draft regulation, may affect acquisition planning but could also help reduce unnecessary regulatory and administrative burdens. The SEC is accepting comments on the proposed changes through its website until November 30, 2024.

The key proposed changes are detailed below.

  • Alignment of tender offers and reporting under Section 246: Previously, Section 246 (reporting of acquisition/disposition upon reaching or crossing any multiple of 5% shareholding) focused only on group shareholding changes, while Section 247 (tender offer obligation) looked at both groups and individuals to trigger tender offering obligations. The proposed amendment aligns these requirements by considering only group-level triggers for both sections.

    Another change addresses situations where an entity acquires another entity (persons under Section 258) that already holds shares in a listed company. Currently, actions of shareholders in a listed company resulting in a person under Section 258 and such shareholders as a group holding shares in a listed company in aggregate and triggering the tender offer threshold only result in reporting under Section 246 while having no tender offer obligation.

    Under the proposed amendment, such actions will trigger a tender offer obligation—not immediately upon the acquisition of persons under Section 258 and reaching or crossing the relevant threshold, but once there is any increase (even a single share) in the shareholding in the listed company, unless the circumstances fall into an exemption (e.g., disposal of the additional shares within seven business days) or a waiver is obtained. Currently, obligations are triggered at the next threshold, but this amendment will implement a “one share rule” instead.

  • Expanded exemptions to tender offer obligations: The proposed amendments ease tender offer rules, especially when there will be no significant change of control. Some of the key proposed new exemptions include securities acquisitions conducted in the following situations:
    • To comply with other laws;
    • Through an amalgamation or a preferential public offering (PPO) to maintain shareholder proportions (similar to a rights offering (RO)), without seeking additional control; or
    • As part of a rehabilitation plan approved by the court or in compliance with a Bank of Thailand regulation related to a plan to resolve financial institution issues.
  • Pricing transparency: The proposed changes designate the pricing method for making a tender offer through the chain principle, by requiring the use of the highest acquisition cost 90 days prior to the submission of the tender offer form to the SEC. If there was no acquisition in that period, pricing calculations should be based on the VWAP (volume-weighted average price) over a period starting 20 business days before the acquisition date. Further clarification may be needed regarding which level of the chain should be used for pricing calculation.
  • Tender offer conditions: The proposed change aims to have the tender offeror ensure that its Section 258 persons comply with certain mandatory conditions (e.g., not obtaining shares at a price higher than the tender offer price in the six months following the end of the tender offer period, and taking no actions differing from those specified in the tender offer in the year following the tender offer period). This includes obligations to comply with applicable exemptions, such as those allowing for a partial tender offer.
  • Whitewash exemptions: The proposed amendment expands the whitewash exemption to cover any new investors from a private placement of remaining shares after an RO or PPO, instead of only granting whitewash exemptions to existing shareholders as under the current rule. However, the private placement threshold allowable under the whitewash exemption has not yet been specified and will require further clarification from the SEC.

The consultation period for the SEC’s proposed amendments to Thailand’s takeover rules is open until November 30, 2024. As there is not yet a formal draft regulation, the opinions gathered on the proposed principles described above will receive consideration as the draft is being prepared. Another hearing can be expected once a draft regulation is available.

For further guidance on takeover regulations, or any aspect of capital markets in Thailand, please contact our experts Patcharaporn Pootranon at [email protected], Veerakorn Samranweth at [email protected], or Narita Sakunchotikarote at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Practices

Capital Markets

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
Read More
October 1, 2025
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
Read More
July 2, 2025
On June 17, 2025, Cambodia’s Ministry of Economy and Finance issued Instruction No. 18574 on Tax Obligations for Share Premiums to clarify that enterprises are not required to pay any income tax on share premiums that meet the conditions set out in the instruction. As outlined in the relevant provisions of the Law on Taxation (Royal Kram No. NS/RKM/0523/004) and Prakas No. 578 MEF.PrK.GDT on Tax on Income, taxable income is the difference between an asset’s value at the beginning and end of a period. This calculation deducts capital contributions, which are not taxable. A share premium is the amount of money that a company receives in excess of the par value of a share when the company issues new shares to a shareholder through a share subscription. In other words, share premiums are capital contributions made by shareholders into the equity of the company and, as a result, are not taxable. However, the government may nevertheless view share premiums as taxable if the company fails to meet certain legal conditions. Cambodian law requires share subscriptions to be properly recorded in the company’s accounting books and supported by documentary evidence. The recent instruction states that if an enterprise does not have proper documentation, any increase in equity, such as a capital increase through share premiums, will be treated as taxable income in accordance with the law. The instruction provides the following example: Enterprise A issues 200,000 new shares to an investor. The shares were registered with a par value of KHR 4,000 per share and were sold for a sale price of KHR 10,000 per share. The share premium of KHR 1.2 billion, which is calculated by subtracting the total par value (KHR 800 million) from the total value of the new capital (KHR 2 billion), is a capital
Read More
May 28, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins attorneys in Vietnam have contributed the 2025 edition of Doing Business in Vietnam, a comprehensive Q&A-style resource from Thomson Reuters Practical Law that provides essential insights for companies navigating business operations in Vietnam. The guide presents a detailed overview of the country’s legal framework and regulatory environment, reflecting recent updates in Vietnamese legislation and practice. This annually updated guide offers key information on the following areas: Legal system: Structure of the Vietnamese judiciary and the role of codified law. Foreign investment: Conditions for market access, licensing requirements, foreign ownership restrictions, and investment incentives. Business vehicles: Formation and operation of legal entities, including limited liability companies, joint-stock companies, and representative offices. Employment: Employment contracts, social insurance, labor rights, and procedures for hiring foreign nationals. Tax: Overview of corporate income tax, personal income tax, value-added tax, and other tax obligations. Intellectual property: Procedures for protecting and enforcing patents, trademarks, copyrights, and other IP rights. Data protection: Compliance requirements under Vietnam’s data privacy laws, including the Personal Data Protection Decree. Competition law: Antitrust rules and regulatory oversight under the Law on Competition. Anti-bribery and corruption: Legal framework and enforcement practices aimed at curbing corrupt activities. E-commerce and digital business: Regulations governing online platforms, digital content, and cross-border services. Marketing and advertising: Laws and guidelines on advertising standards and consumer protection. Product regulation and liability: Safety requirements, product liability issues, and roles of relevant authorities. Doing Business in Vietnam is part of Practical Law’s global series of legal guides designed to support international practitioners and businesses. To access the most recent edition of the Vietnam guide, visit the Practical Law website and sign up for a free trial.
Read More