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 19, 2025

Thailand Drafts AI Risk Management Guidelines for Financial Service Providers

Subscribe to Updates

The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has released draft guidelines establishing principles for managing artificial intelligence (AI) risks in the financial sector. The draft guidelines provide a structured framework for the responsible adoption of AI technologies. Financial service providers will be able to use the guidelines as a reference to appropriately manage their risks in a manner that aligns with internationally recognized best practices.

The BOT is accepting public comments on the draft guidelines until June 30, 2025.

Scope and Application

The draft guidelines apply to all financial service providers, including financial institutions and special financial institutions under the Financial Institution Business Act, as well as payment providers under the Payment Systems Act. These guidelines supplement existing BOT risk management guidelines covering IT risk management, third-party risk management, data governance, and market conduct.

The guidelines define AI systems as systems that mimic human intelligence, including machine learning, deep learning, generative AI (such as large language models), and agentic AI. This definition specifically excludes rule-based automation systems like robotic process automation and condition matching.

Key Risk Management Principles

The guidelines lay out two main principles in managing AI risk.

  1. Governance: Financial service providers should define and establish clear roles and responsibilities for their personnel and AI system supervision structures to uphold FEAT (fairness, ethics, accountability, and transparency) principles as follows:
    • Stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Financial service providers should define roles and responsibilities for boards and executives on AI risk oversight. Responsibilities include establishing an AI system usage policy, designating personnel responsible for AI risk management, and building awareness of AI-related risk within the organization.
    • AI system usage policy. The AI system usage policy should be aligned with organizational objectives, regulatory requirements, and FEAT principles. These policies should be reviewed regularly to respond to technological advancements and evolving risk profiles.
    • Risk management throughout the AI lifecycle. Risk management should encompass the entire AI lifecycle, from establishing risk appetite to implementing continuous risk assessment and control measures tailored to specific use cases. When AI systems are used in strategic functions or customer interactions (e.g., loan approval, account opening), human oversight must be integrated into decision-making processes. In customer interactions with AI systems, customers should be notified and have options to disable or bypass AI features.
  1. Development and security controls: Financial service providers should have risk controls covering the AI development and deployment lifecycle as follows:
    • Data risk. Financial service providers should have measures to assess and ensure the quality, accuracy, currency, volume, and diversity of data used in AI model training. They should also implement data leakage prevention measures.
    • Model development risk. Financial service providers should have (1) clear evaluation metrics for assessing model accuracy and reliability through ongoing testing and monitoring both before and after deployment and (2) measures to ensure the explainability of AI outcomes. For generative AI applications, there should be specific measures to reduce AI hallucination risks.
    • Cybersecurity risk. Financial service providers should have measures to prevent and detect emerging cyber threats targeting AI systems, based on established standards such as the OWASP Machine Learning Security Top 10.

For more details on any aspect of fintech, technology, and cybersecurity in Thailand, please contact Athistha Chitranukroh at [email protected], Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected], Pornpan Wichawut at [email protected], Napassorn Lertussavavivat at [email protected], or Rujaporn Paritsantik at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 11, 2021
After approximately a decade drafting general personal data protection laws and formulating a regime to protect personal data and privacy rights, Thailand finally issued the country’s first unified personal data protection legislation in 2019. The public was surprised when the draft Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) was published for the final round of hearings. The draft PDPA largely adopted the preeminent personal data protection standards as expressed in the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The government expressed its objective to enhance personal data protection standards in Thailand to meet international standards, which would permit cross border transfers of personal data to Thailand, without any material limitations. The PDPA, which was finally published in the Government Gazette in May 2019, also established a new independent regulator, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC), tasked with enforcing the PDPA. All members of the commission must possess the qualifications required by the PDPA. The PDPA was enacted with a grace period of one year for the requirements relating to the processing of personal data—which would provide businesses with sufficient time to adjust their practices to ensure compliance with the new requirements. It is a significant undertaking for businesses to adjust from having no general law on data protection to being required to meet high international data protection standards comparable to those in the GDPR. GPDR concepts that were incorporated into the PDPA include (1) purpose limitation, (2) transparency, (3) lawfulness and fairness, and (4) data minimization. When collecting personal data, data controllers are required to establish a lawful basis to allow for such collection and processing of personal data. The lawful bases for general personal data are also similar to those under the GDPR, with concepts such as contractual necessity, legal obligation, legitimate interest, vital interest, and consent. Special types of
Read More
February 2, 2021
On February 1, 2021, through Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, the Office of Personal Data Protection Commission announced that it will arrange public hearing sessions for the first set of subordinate regulations under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). Subordinate regulations on the following topics will be covered during the consultations: Consent Privacy notices Responsibilities of data controllers Cross-border data transfers Data protection officers Security measures Compliance processes Sensitive personal data It is anticipated that the draft subordinate regulations will be circulated (in Thai) to registered attendees ahead of the sessions. Participation by video conferencing will be available. In addition, at the First ASEAN Digital Ministers’ Meeting on January 21 and 22, 2021, the ASEAN Data Management Framework (DMF) and the Model Contractual Clauses for Cross Border Data Flows (MCCs) were approved in order to promote the secure free flow of data between ASEAN countries, including Thailand. The development of the Thai PDPA is expected to factor into these DMF and MCC initiatives, potentially allowing businesses in Thailand to transfer data between neighboring countries within the region, in addition to the permitted transfer between countries whitelisted under the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). These initiatives were led by the Singapore Personal Data Protection Commission, and more details are expected in due course. Prior to the PDPA effective date on June 1, 2021, substantial further developments are expected to give further clarification and guidance for businesses, and to ease their compliance concerns. For more information on this development, or any other aspect of data protection in Thailand, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins’ data protection team led by Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh ([email protected]).
Read More
January 29, 2021
Members of Tilleke & Gibbins’ technology team contributed the Vietnam chapter of the recently published Data Protection Laws of the World (10th Edition), a widely consulted handbook to privacy and data protection laws across more than 100 different jurisdictions.
Read More
January 14, 2021
On November 26, 2020, the Notification of the Ministry of Finance Re: Addition to Other Business Relating to Digital Assets B.E. 2563 (2020) (the Digital Asset Business Notification) and the Notification of the Ministry of Finance Re: Licensing of Digital Asset Business No. 2 B.E. 2563 (2020) (the Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification) were published in the Thai Government Gazette. Additional Digital Asset Businesses The new Digital Assets Business Notification adds two new categories of digital assets business to the list prescribed in the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018). Digital Asset Fund Manager is defined as a person who manages funds from digital assets for another person for benefits, or holds themselves out to the general public as being ready to do so, in the ordinary course of business. It does not include the management of digital assets as prescribed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Digital Asset Advisory Service is defined as a person who provides consultations to other people, directly or indirectly, regarding the value of digital assets; the suitability of investment in digital assets; or the buying, selling, or exchanging of any digital assets in the ordinary course of business in return for service fees or other compensation. However, this does not include consultations as a part of or relating to a digital asset exchange, digital asset broker, digital asset dealer, digital asset fund manager, or other personal consultation as prescribed by the SEC. Additional Digital Asset Licensing Requirements The Digital Asset Business Licensing Notification amends the definition of “License Applicant” to include cryptocurrency exchanges, digital token exchanges, cryptocurrency brokers, digital token brokers, cryptocurrency dealers, digital token dealers, cryptocurrency fund managers, digital token fund managers, cryptocurrency advisory services, and digital token advisory services. Additional requirements for granting licenses have also been added
Read More