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

August 14, 2026

Thailand Identifies Online Triggers of Insurance Licensing Requirements

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Office of the Insurance Commission (OIC) has issued guidelines clarifying the boundaries between permissible and prohibited activities for unlicensed individuals—including influencers, bloggers, and content creators—when communicating about insurance products on social media. The Good Practice Guidelines for Persons Not Licensed as Insurance Agents or Brokers Regarding the Dissemination of Insurance Content Through Digital Media B.E. 2569 (2026) took effect on July 24, 2026.

Activities Requiring a License

The guidelines reserve the following activities for licensed agents and brokers:

  • Soliciting or facilitating insurance contracts.
  • Providing personalized advice on product suitability.
  • Recommending policy cancellation to purchase promoted products.
  • Creating links that facilitate contract formation.
  • Receiving performance-based compensation tied to policies or premiums generated.

Importantly, boilerplate disclaimers such as “this is not a recommendation to buy insurance” will not shield individuals from liability if the OIC views the content as personalized advice or solicitation.

Permitted Activities

Unlicensed persons may present general educational content about insurance—such as explaining terminology, sharing industry statistics, reporting news, or sharing personal experiences—provided the content does not target specific individuals to purchase from specific companies.

The guidelines also set out best practices for communication, including presenting information in a fair and balanced manner that covers both benefits and limitations, encouraging consumers to read policy terms and consult licensed professionals, verifying information from credible sources before dissemination, and exercising special care when the audience may include vulnerable groups such as persons aged 60 and older.

Prohibited Practices

Prohibited practices include fear-based marketing, creating artificial urgency, omitting material limitations, making exaggerated claims, falsely claiming professional credentials, using fake engagement mechanisms, and sharing false or misleading content.

The guidelines also reinforce the prohibitions under section 83 of the Life Insurance Act B.E. 2535 and section 78 of the Non-Life Insurance Act B.E. 2535 against soliciting insurance contracts with foreign operators not licensed in Thailand—including recommending such companies, sharing sign-up links, or providing application guidance. Failure to comply with these guidelines may lead to imprisonment for up to six months, a fine of up to THB 50,000, or both.

Sponsored Advertising Requirements

Sponsored content must be governed by a written agreement with insurance companies or brokers, covering scope, content approval processes, and compensation (which must not be performance-based). All content requires preapproval from insurance companies and/or brokers, and any personal comments or post approval edits must be approved by insurance companies and/or brokers.

Content disseminators must disclose both the sponsorship relationship and their license status, and must verify that the commissioning party is properly licensed with the OIC. The guidelines also set out format-specific disclosure requirements:

  • Still images and animations must display disclosure text rather than requiring viewers to click to read more.
  • Short-form videos must show on-screen text throughout or at the start.
  • Long-form videos must include disclosures at the beginning and in the video description.
  • Carousel posts must include disclosures on at least the first image, and preferably on every image.
  • Audio and podcasts require spoken announcements.
  • Livestreams require continuous on-screen disclosures with periodic verbal announcements.

Unlicensed persons must additionally state: “This advertiser is not licensed as an insurance agent or broker. This content is for informational purposes only. Please consult a licensed professional before making a decision.”

Ongoing Monitoring Obligations

Content disseminators must continuously monitor published content and comment sections, promptly correct inaccuracies, remove fraudulent links, direct viewer inquiries to licensed professionals or the OIC hotline (1186), and maintain records of corrective actions.

Key Implications for Stakeholders

The guidelines provide clarity for all stakeholders involved in online insurance content:

  • Insurance companies and licensed intermediaries engaging influencers or content creators will need to implement comprehensive written agreements, preapproval workflows, and compensation structures not linked to performance.
  • Influencers, bloggers, and content creators now have clearer boundaries defining permissible activity, along with disclosure obligations and monitoring duties.
  • Foreign insurance companies without a Thai license will find it harder to use local influencers as a marketing channel and will face greater challenges providing insurance products and services through online channels.

Next Steps

Affected stakeholders should review their existing practices, contracts, and compliance procedures against these clearer regulatory boundaries. Offshore insurance companies and brokers should revisit their internal guidelines when conducting activities related to customers in Thailand.

Related Professionals

Industries

Insurance

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More
June 5, 2026
Thailand’s Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) has opened a public hearing on proposed amendments to the OIC Notification on Criteria for Information Technology Risk Governance and Management for Life Insurance and Non-Life Insurance Companies B.E. 2563 (2020) via the centralized Law platform. The public consultation period runs from May 8, 2026, to June 9, 2026. The proposed amendments aim to elevate the IT risk governance and cybersecurity risk management framework to be more modern and aligned with international standards, with a focus on strengthening cyber resilience, enhancing the role of IT audits, and establishing data governance and data quality controls. The parties affected by these amendments include life insurance companies, non-life insurance companies, and external IT auditors. Key Changes Elevated Role of Board of Directors The proposed notification requires the company’s board of directors to oversee data governance, cybersecurity, and the responsible use of AI. Additionally, the board should include at least one director with IT knowledge or experience. Companies are also required to designate a head of security responsible for information security. The board’s duties are expanded to include oversight of data governance and AI usage, including establishing relevant policies and committees. Enhanced IT Security and Cybersecurity The revised notification consolidates the existing chapters on IT project management, IT security and cybersecurity to reduce redundancy, and introduces significant new measures. These include mandatory multi-factor authentication for material systems, enhanced data security measures such as data masking and data leakage prevention, security hardening requirements, web filtering, and mandatory vulnerability assessment and penetration testing at least annually. New requirements are also introduced for mobile application security, API security, and security measures for emerging technologies such as cloud computing and post quantum cryptography. The cybersecurity framework now encompasses identification, protection, detection, response, and recovery. The draft also introduces source code review
Read More
June 5, 2026
Vietnam’s AI regulatory framework has reached an important milestone. While the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law) established the foundation for AI governance, many practical compliance requirements were left to implementing regulations. On April 30, 2026, the government issued Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142), which took effect on May 1, 2026, and provides the first detailed guidance on the implementation of the AI Law. Although an official list of high-risk AI systems is still pending from the prime minister, Decree 142 provides valuable insight into how Vietnam’s risk-based AI regulatory framework will operate in practice. Risk Classification Framework The AI Law adopts a risk-based approach under which AI systems are classified as high-risk, medium-risk, or low-risk. Decree 142 builds on this framework by providing detailed guidance on how these classifications are determined. High-risk AI systems are determined based on factors such as (i) their potential impact on life, health, property, human rights, public interests, or national security; (ii) the sector in which they are deployed; and (iii) the scale of affected users or integration with critical infrastructure. The latest draft list of high-risk AI systems appears to follow these same principles. Medium-risk AI systems generally include systems that may mislead, influence, or manipulate users, particularly where users may not realize they are interacting with AI or AI-generated content. The focus is therefore on transparency and authenticity risks rather than broader societal or safety concerns. Low-risk AI systems are those that do not meet the criteria for either high-risk or medium-risk classification. Importantly, Decree 142 seeks to avoid over-classification. Certain systems may fall outside the high-risk or medium-risk regimes, including internal-use systems, office-support tools, technical editing applications, certain back-end processing systems, and AI systems used in artistic, gaming, cinematic, or other creative contexts. Providers must also review and
Read More