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 10, 2026

Thailand Expands “Major Shareholder” Definition for Securities and Digital Asset Businesses

Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets.

Expanded Definition

Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder.

Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution

For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder.

First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier shareholders of an entity that directly holds more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company (or where an entity holds 100% or nearly 100% in the layer above), and (2) ultimate shareholders holding more than 50% of the voting rights at each level of an unbroken ownership chain. These approaches reflect the previous application of the shareholding-based test.

Second, the SEC will apply a pro rata calculation to identify ultimate beneficial owners whose effective economic interests in the regulated entity exceed 10%, even where no single tier holds more than 50% of the voting rights. This proportional attribution method increases transparency in complex multilayered ownership structures and reduces the risk of circumvention through dispersed shareholdings. The calculation method will significantly broaden the pool of persons deemed major shareholders under the new rules.

Control-Based Test Adds New Trigger

In addition to the shareholding-based test, the amendments introduce a separate control-based test under which a person may qualify as a major shareholder.

Under the separate control-based test, shareholders will be deemed “major” if they possess the authority to appoint or remove at least half of the company’s board of directors or control a majority of votes at shareholder meetings, regardless of the basis for such authority. This provision captures persons who may hold relatively small equity stakes but nevertheless exercise significant influence over the company’s management or decision-making.

Attribution to Related Persons

In determining whether the major shareholder threshold is met, the SEC will aggregate shareholdings and control among spouses (including de facto partners), minor children, and persons acting in concert. Licensed operators must exercise reasonable efforts to review relevant relationships and identify such arrangements to ensure that all shareholders and controlling persons captured under the new framework are submitted for SEC approval.

Transition and Compliance Timeline

Persons who were approved as major shareholders under the previous regulations are deemed approved under the revised framework. However, where a person newly falls within the expanded definition, the licensed operator must file an application with the SEC for approval of that person as a major shareholder within 180 days of February 21, 2026 (conservatively, August 19, 2026).

For changes involving major shareholders by any action rather than as a result of these amendments, the application must be filed no later than 14 days after the licensed operator becomes aware, or has reason to know, that the person qualifies as a major shareholder under the expanded definition. For newly issued shares, licensed operators must submit the application before a person becomes a major shareholder.

Practical Implications

Securities firms and digital asset business operators should review their shareholding structures and governance arrangements to identify persons who may now qualify as major shareholders. This includes:

  • Mapping multi-tier corporate chains and calculating effective ownership percentages;
  • Examining board nomination and removal rights under shareholder agreements or bylaws; and
  • Documenting spousal and family relationships as well as potential acting-in-concert arrangements.

Operators should prioritize compliance for persons captured under the transitional provisions. Failure to obtain approval within the prescribed 180-day period will result in regulatory enforcement.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 28, 2023
Influencer marketing and the creation of sponsored content is an increasingly popular way for brands to reach their target audience. Although there is no universal definition of an “influencer,” the term is broadly used to describe people who are able to affect purchasing decisions of others through their relationship with their audience. In the context of social media and the creator economy, influencers are usually people with significant followings on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, or YouTube who are viewed as celebrities, opinion leaders, trendsetters, or experts in their respective field. Based on a study conducted by Nielsen in 2022, 80% of social media users in Asia who follow influencers are likely to purchase products recommended by the influencers. Brand owners should be aware of five key legal considerations when entering into influencer marketing agreements. 1. Making informed decisions through due diligence Every collaboration with an influencer is a business relationship. Brands must conduct thorough due diligence on potential influencers prior to engaging them. This may include deep dives into the individual’s old social media posts, as well as requests for disclosure of prior controversial incidents and existing brand associations. For example, a health and fitness brand may not want—for both legal and commercial reasons—to be publicly associated with an influencer who is a brand ambassador of electronic cigarettes, no matter how impressive the latter’s Instagram following or deadlift record is. Brands should also ensure that their influencer marketing agreements include relevant representations and warranties that the influencer has not and will not commit a crime or act in a way that may cause negative publicity for the brand. This may include racist, extremist, homophobic, violent, or misogynistic acts, or any other acts that are obscene or against public order. 2. Clearly defining the scope of engagement Brands
February 26, 2023
Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) has been working to replace the outdated 2009 Telecom Law with a new version more suited to today’s digital economy. A draft Telecom Law was made available for public consultation from October 27 to December 27, 2022. On January 17, 2023, the MIC submitted an amended draft (the “Draft”) to the Ministry of Justice for appraisal (the Vietnamese version of the Draft and accompanying documents in the dossier can be accessed here). The Draft is scheduled to be discussed by the National Assembly in May 2023 and submitted for approval in October 2023. The key content and changes of the Draft as compared to the existing law are set out below. 1. Licensing Telecom Services For domestic enterprises, the 2009 Telecom Law only provides two types of licenses—telecom network establishment licenses and telecom service business licenses—without differentiating the conditions and licensing procedures for various types of telecom services. This no longer meets management requirements and does not encourage enterprises to participate in providing new services on already existing infrastructure. Although the Draft retains the two main types of licenses—licenses to provide telecom services with network establishment for a term of not more than 15 years; and licenses to provide telecom services without network establishment with a term of no more than 10 years—it also provides different licensing conditions for different types of telecom service provision, with three kinds of licensing: (i) individual licenses for certain enterprises with specific conditions and obligations based on telecom management objectives at the time of licensing; (ii) class licenses for businesses that meet the prescribed licensing conditions; and (iii) registration, which requires businesses only to submit registration information according to the prescribed form to be licensed. In addition, to avoid the situation of licensed telecom network enterprises
February 24, 2023
Noppparat Lalitkomon, head of Tilleke & Gibbins’ data protection team in Thailand, has prepared the Thailand contribution for the Data Privacy Trends and Topics Report, published by Lex Mundi. The report provides brief overviews of recent and upcoming regulatory and legal developments concerning data privacy in the jurisdictions of Lex Mundi member firms in 53 jurisdictions around the world. Drawing on the expertise of Lex Mundi member firms from around the world, the report features local insights to help businesses handle cross-border data and cybersecurity challenges. Lex Mundi has also compiled a global overview of how firms in each region assess the likelihood of significant changes to the data protection landscape in 2023. Notably, Asia and the Pacific is identified as the region most likely to undergo changes, with 73% of reporting firms expecting significant developments in their jurisdictions. The report containing all 53 contributions—grouped by world region—is available on the Lex Mundi website or through the button below.
February 16, 2023
Thailand has issued a Royal Decree on the Supervision of Regulated Digital Identification Authentication and Verification Service Businesses B.E. 2565 (2022) (the “Royal Decree”), aimed at regulating business operators that provide digital identification authentication and verification services (“Digital ID Services”). The Royal Decree was published in the Government Gazette in December 2022, and will take effect 180 days from the publication date, i.e., on June 21, 2023. The key details and requirements of the Royal Decree are as follows: Regulated Digital ID Services Under the Royal Decree, the provision of the following Digital ID Services requires prior approval from the Electronic Transaction Development Agency: Identity verification service – Services for collecting and identifying information relating to the identity of a person, and verifying the connections between the person and the identity. Authenticator issuance and management service – Services relating to the connection between a person who has passed the identification process with an authenticator, and managing actions which are used to identify a person. Authentication service – A process to authenticate a person by inspecting his/her authenticator. Digital ID networks/systems – Provision of networks or systems used to exchange information for digital identification purposes, excluding services provided by an intermediary. Exempted Digital ID Services The Royal Decree also specifies a list of Digital ID Services that are exempted from supervision under the Royal Decree, as follows: Issuance of certificates to support the use of electronic signatures in accordance with the Electronic Transaction Act. Digital ID Services conducted for use within the operator’s own business only, and which do not involve the provision of such services to third parties. Other Digital ID Services as prescribed by the Electronic Transaction Committee. Qualifications of Business Operators The types of business operators qualified to operate Digital ID Services include (i) private limited companies;