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 27, 2023

Thailand: ETDA Stipulates Digital Platform Risk Assessment and Identity Verification

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Electronic Transaction Development Agency (ETDA) has released two new subordinate regulations under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Services: one detailing the assessment of digital platform services (DPSs) that will be deemed “high-risk” and subject to additional obligations, and another setting guidelines on user verification and authentication for all DPSs.

The two subordinate regulations are summarized below.

Impact Assessment of DPS Operations

Under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Services, DPS operations that have the risk of seriously impacting financial and commercial security, reliability and credibility of data message systems, or the general public are subject to additional obligations. The first subordinate regulation mentioned above (officially titled Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission Re: Criteria for Impact Assessment on Operation of Digital Platform Services) outlines the criteria for the ETDA to determine which DPSs are “high-risk.” DPSs falling under this designation include:

  • DPSs whose total value of transactions conducted through the platform in Thailand exceeds THB 100 million (approx. USD 2.8 million) per year;
  • DPSs whose operators have not registered their entities with the Department of Business Development (DBD)—notably overseas operators—and that have 100 or more merchants or business users in Thailand or total users in Thailand between 5 and 10 percent of the country’s population (i.e., approx. 3.3–6.1 million users, calculated using official 2022 figures);
  • DPSs that allow their users to freely post certain messages, or do certain acts, that may affect the public in certain cases, such as: (1) unlawful messages or acts; (2) messages or acts that may affect a child’s rights or people’s fundamental rights; and (3) messages or acts that may negatively affect political opinions of Thai citizens (whether before or after an election) or statements or actions likely to negatively affect other individuals due to gender differences or sexual violence.

After considering these criteria and the details provided by DPS operators when notifying the ETDA, the ETDA will announce a list of the types or names of “high-risk DPSs.”

According to the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Services, the high-risk DPSs must:

  • Conduct risk assessments;
  • Implement risk management measures;
  • Conduct hearings for changes to terms and conditions for providing the DPS;
  • Report on their compliance with the above obligations on an annual basis; and
  • Comply with other obligations to be prescribed by the ETDA.

Identification and Verification

The second subordinate regulation (Notification Re: Manual for Identification and Verification Process) prescribes the manual and standards for the identification and verification of DPS users. The manual serves as a guideline for DPS operators on verifying and authenticating the identity of high-risk or potentially impactful users. This may include users who have greater access rights or the ability to access more features than regular users, users with numbers of followers exceeding a defined threshold (e.g., more than 5,000 followers), and users with transaction volumes or frequencies exceeding specified limits (e.g., a total transaction value of more than THB 50,000 per month).

DPS operators should comply with the identity verification and authentication requirements for user registration on digital platforms by at least undertaking the following:

  • Verifying the identity of applicants for DPS user registration. Information for verifying the identity of service applicants should be from the results of identity verification by identity providers (IDPs) that have previously verified the individual’s identity (such as verifying the Thai ID card information issued by the Ministry of Interior). IDPs should support at least identity assurance level 2 (IAL2).
  • Collecting user data. For the purpose of verification and authentication, DPS operators should collect data such as name and surname, ID card number or passport number, and contact details of individual users (or for corporate entities, name of the company, corporate registration number, and name of any authorized persons). DPS operators should collect additional user data as appropriate to the nature of their DPS. For example, digital platforms categorized as online marketplaces may collect electronic commerce registration numbers.
  • Determining the access rights and features accessible on the platform. DPS operators should specify the access rights and accessible features for users based on the level of identity verification and authentication or based on the user data collected. Users who have undergone identity verification and authentication at a higher level may be granted greater access rights and more accessible features.
  • Displaying symbols or statements confirming identity verification and authentication. DPS operators should have a “verified” badge indicating that a user has completed identity verification using the methods defined by the DPS operator. The badge should be a clear and easily accessible and understandable symbol or statement. The display format should be adaptive to different screen sizes.
  • Confirming the identity of users accessing the DPS. DPS operators should ensure that the identity verification of users logging in to the DPS achieves a reliability level of at least authentication assurance level 2 (AAL2) or rely on the results of identity verification obtained from another IDP that has previously verified the individual’s identity.

For more information on compliance with the requirements for digital platform services in Thailand, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins’ digital platform specialists Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected], Rada Lamsam at [email protected], or Karnravee Jitvilai at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 11, 2026
On July 27, 2026, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) released a draft decree proposing amendments to Decree No. 52/2024/ND-CP dated May 15, 2024, on non-cash payments (Decree 52). The draft decree would amend 17 of Decree 52’s 38 articles, with several key changes directly affecting providers of intermediary payment service (IPS). The key proposed changes affecting IPS providers are outlined below. Streamlining IPS Licensing Procedures A central objective of the draft decree is to simplify regulatory procedures for IPS providers. Notably, it would significantly reduce IPS licensing documentation requirements by removing the need to submit enterprise registration certificates, investment registration certificates, and documents evidencing the qualifications of the legal representative and general director. Instead, the SBV would retrieve this information directly from national business registration and other specialized databases, requesting additional documents only where the relevant information cannot be verified electronically or is incomplete. The draft decree also removes the current limit of two rounds for dossier supplementation and shortens processing timelines for several IPS licensing procedures such as issuance, amendment, and reissuance of IPS licenses. The processing time for new IPS license applications would be thereby reduced from 90 to 60 working days. In addition, several continuing IPS business conditions would be removed. For example, IPS providers would no longer be required to maintain certain representations relating to corporate restructuring or the legality of contributed capital. Likewise, the IPS project plan (đề án) would become a one-time application document rather than an ongoing licensing condition. If retained in the final decree, this change could provide IPS providers with significantly greater flexibility to implement post-licensing technology upgrades, system integrations, and corporate restructuring transactions without needing to revisit the originally approved project plan. The draft decree also removes the requirement for the SBV to consult the Ministry of Public
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for
Read More
August 10, 2026
On July 31, 2026, Thailand’s Big Data Institute (BDI) launched a public consultation on the principles of a proposed new data-sharing law, with comments accepted until August 31, 2026. If enacted, the law would establish Thailand’s first comprehensive framework for government and private-sector data sharing, creating a systematic, secure, and transparent regime to support analytics, policymaking, research, and innovation. Central Data-Sharing Platform The draft law establishes a central system for data sharing, managed by the BDI. Government agencies would be required to connect to the BDI’s Data Integration and Intelligence Platform (also referred to as D2), in accordance with the BDI’s rules and procedures. Five Dimensions of Data Sharing The draft law covers five key types of data sharing between government (G), businesses (B), and consumers (C): G2B: Private organizations may request government data specifically for research and development purposes. The BDI will assess the applicant’s data governance, security, and privacy capabilities whether such measures meet prescribed standards before forwarding the request to the relevant government agency within 90 days. Any dispute may be escalated to a newly established Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for final determination. G2G: Government agencies may request data from other agencies through the central system. The data-holding agency must respond within 90 days, taking legality, necessity, proportionality, public interest, and personal data protection into account. Disputes may be referred to the Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for adjudication. B2G: In emergency situations involving public safety, economic security, or disaster response, the Minister of Digital Economy and Society may require private entities to provide data through the central data-sharing system. Government agencies must specify the data requested, demonstrate its necessity and expected benefits, and request only data reasonably available to the data holder. Requests for personal data must be limited to the minimum amount necessary. B2C: Royal decrees may
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,
Read More