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

June 30, 2017

Thailand: Amendments to the Petroleum Act and Petroleum Income Tax Act

Subscribe to Updates

On June 17, 2017, the Petroleum Act (No. 7) B.E. 2560 and the Petroleum Income Tax Act (No. 7) B.E. 2560 were both enacted, amending their predecessor laws. The amendments to both statutes entered into force on June 23, 2017. The amendments had been anticipated for some time, introducing production sharing agreements (PSAs) and service contracts as alternative host government instruments by which upstream oil and gas producers may invest in Thailand.

Traditionally, the concession has been the sole means by which oil and gas could be explored for or produced in Thailand. Acting similarly to a license, the Thai concession stipulates that petroleum is the property of the state, though ownership transfers to the concessionaire at the wellhead. The amendments to the Petroleum Act do not eliminate the potential use of concessions, but rather provide two new instruments for the Ministry of Energy (MOE) to utilize when contracting with petroleum producers.

Production Sharing Agreements

The MOE will now be permitted to define appropriate blocks to be explored and produced by way of a PSA. Sections 53/1 through 53/8 of the Petroleum Act now outline a number of basic principles relating to PSAs and clauses to be found in the PSA itself, including the following:

  • Minimum amounts of capital to be injected by the private oil and gas producer;
  • Allocation of ownership interests in produced petroleum between the private oil and gas producer and the Thai state, including provision for the private oil and gas producer to dispose of petroleum on behalf of the state;
  • Duty of the private oil and gas producer to submit a plan and budget for approval to the Petroleum Committee before starting the project; and
  • Clauses pertaining to management of operations, penalties in the event of noncompliance, and termination of the PSA.

Unlike concessions, under the PSA the Thai state will retain ownership over a portion of the petroleum after it has been produced.

Service Contracts

Similar to PSAs, the MOE will now be permitted to determine appropriate blocks to be exploited via a service contract. Unlike the PSA or the concession, where the private oil and gas producer obtains ownership in some or all of the produced petroleum, produced petroleum under the service contract belongs exclusively to the Thai state. Sections 53/9 through 53/18 of the Petroleum Act outline a number of key aspects of the service contracts to be used in Thailand, including:

  • Greater government control over exploration and production decision-making; and
  • A maximum duration of three years for any service contract.

Amendments to Petroleum Income Tax Act

The amended Petroleum Income Tax Act accommodates the addition of PSAs to the Petroleum Act and makes other revisions to the taxation regime for upstream producers. Production sharing producers will be taxed at the rate of 20 percent of net profits, subject to other provisions of the Petroleum Income Tax Act. Amendments to the general taxation regime for upstream producers include the ability to deduct certain parent company expenditures on the Thai subsidiary’s behalf, as to be prescribed in further detail in forthcoming Ministerial Regulations.

Conclusions and Looking Forward

The MOE has been granted the authority to prescribe detailed rules relating to PSAs and service contracts by adopting Ministerial Regulations pursuant to Sections 53/1 and 53/9 of the Petroleum Act. As the MOE and its Department of Mineral Fuels determine appropriate blocks where either arrangement would be suitable, we can anticipate form agreements to be prescribed and utilized in practice.

Related Professionals

Industries

Energy

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 8, 2021
On March 24, 2021, the Prime Minister of Vietnam issued Decision No. 12/2021/QD-TTg issuing regulations on oil spill response. One of the more notable changes is the introduction of templates for oil spill response plans.
Read More
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
Read More
February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions
Read More
February 18, 2021
As you will no doubt know, on February 1, 2021, the Myanmar military declared a state of emergency in Myanmar for a period of one year. State Counsellor Daw Aung Sang Su Kyi was detained, as were the president and various significant political and civil leaders. Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the Tatmadaw (Myanmar armed forces) has installed himself as chairman of the State Administration Council, the current administration. New sanctions The reaction of the Biden administration has been swift. On February 10, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14014, which provides bases to impose sanctions on individuals and companies deemed by the US to, among other things: operate in the defense sector of Myanmar; be responsible for policies that undermine democratic processes in Myanmar; have taken actions to undermine democratic processes or institutions, or prohibit, limit, or penalize the exercise of free speech, in Myanmar; or be a spouse or child of the foregoing. On the next day, February 11, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), imposed sanctions under the new executive order on ten individuals—including General Min Aung Hlaing—and three companies, including Cancri Gems & Jewelry Co, Myanmar Imperial Jade Co, and Myanmar Ruby Enterprise.  All such individuals and companies have now been designated on the US list of specially designated nationals (SDNs). Effect of sanctions As a result of such sanctions, the property of these individuals or companies that is located in the US or is under the possession or control of US companies and citizens is frozen, and US companies and citizens are generally prohibited from dealing deal with any such property.  Reportedly, roughly USD 1 billion of funds belonging to the individuals and companies blocked on February 11 are located in the US and thus now frozen. The SDN list As many
Read More