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

April 2, 2026

Thailand Insurance Industry: AI and Privacy Regulatory Updates

Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) enforcement has entered a new phase, and the insurance industry is squarely in the regulatory spotlight. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) considers insurers “large-scale” processors of sensitive data—including health records, financial information, and biometric data—making the sector a focal point for enforcement action. In August 2025 alone, the PDPC issued administrative fines totaling THB 21.5 million, and fines for individual violations have ranged from THB 50,000 to THB 2 million. The PDPC has also deployed its “Eagle Eye Crawler,” an AI-driven surveillance tool that monitors websites around the clock for data leaks and noncompliant privacy notices. This article highlights the key regulatory developments directly affecting insurers and outlines practical steps toward compliance.

What Has Changed: OIC and PDPC Alignment

The Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) has synchronized its sector-specific rules with the PDPA through the Notification on Customer Personal Data Protection (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025). The combined effect of the PDPC’s general enforcement push and the OIC’s sectoral guidance creates four critical compliance areas for insurers.

  • Consent unbundling. Consent for marketing must be strictly separated from the core insurance contract; bundling marketing consent into the policy application is no longer permissible.
  • Agent and intermediary oversight. Insurance intermediaries are generally classified as data processors, meaning that insurers—as data controllers—must provide specific written instructions and security protocols to all agents and brokers. A 2026 enforcement trend shows controllers being held liable for the “weak security” of their vendors and downstream processors.
  • Enhanced privacy notices. Insurers must provide a summary privacy notice alongside the full policy, plainly stating categories of data, purposes, lawful bases, disclosure recipients, cross-border transfers, retention periods, data subject rights, and easy marketing opt-out channels.
  • DPO registration and ROPA. All organizations involved in “regular or systematic monitoring of data subjects on a large scale”—expressly including insurance—must appoint and register a data protection officer (DPO). The absence of a registered DPO or an outdated record of processing activities (ROPA) that fails to map agent-level data flows is now considered a high-risk compliance gap.

AI in Insurance: Draft PDPC Guidelines

The PDPC’s draft AI guidelines carry particular significance for insurers. The guidelines single out insurance risk assessments as an example of automated decision-making that produces legal effects or significantly affects data subjects. Organizations using AI-driven tools for underwriting, claims processing, or policy recommendations must implement a human-in-the-loop mechanism with actual authority to overturn AI decisions and must document processes for data subjects to request review. A data protection impact assessment (DPIA) is required for high-risk AI projects, including automated decision-making with legal effects and large-scale processing of sensitive data. Leakage of sensitive health or financial data through AI systems is categorized as high risk, requiring notification to both the PDPC and affected data subjects without delay.

Cross-Border Data Transfers

For multinational insurance groups, a binding corporate rules (BCRs) regulation became fully effective on February 17, 2026, providing a formal mechanism for intragroup cross-border transfers. Groups that already hold GDPR-approved BCRs may use a “fast-track” process by submitting their existing BCRs together with a Thailand addendum. Alternatively, Standard Contractual Clauses based on the ASEAN Model Contractual Clauses may be used for transfers to third-party reinsurers or service providers outside Thailand.

Practical Compliance Steps

Given the current regulatory landscape, insurers should consider the following immediate and near-term actions.

  • Governance and organization. Register a DPO with the PDPC if not already done, and ensure that the DPO has a direct reporting line to senior management with sufficient authority and resources to fulfill the role. Update the ROPA to comprehensively map all processing activities, including data flows through agents, brokers, and third-party administrators.
  • Consent architecture overhaul. Redesign application forms and digital onboarding flows so that marketing consent is presented as a separate, clearly labeled opt-in, entirely distinct from the consent required for the insurance contract itself. Ensure that refusal to consent to marketing does not affect the customer’s ability to obtain coverage.
  • Agent and vendor compliance program. Issue updated written instructions and security protocols to all insurance intermediaries classified as data processors. Review and strengthen data processing agreements with all third-party processors, including specific provisions for PDPA responsibilities, security standards, audit rights, breach notification obligations, and end-of-term data deletion or return. Implement a periodic audit cycle—rather than relying on static contractual commitments—to verify vendor compliance.
  • Privacy notice refresh. Prepare a concise summary privacy notice for distribution alongside insurance policies, covering all required elements under the OIC guidance. For digital tele-sales, implement prerecording disclosures informing customers that their voice or image data will be processed under the PDPA.
  • AI and automated decision-making readiness. Conduct DPIAs for all AI-driven underwriting, claims, and risk-assessment tools currently in use or under development. Establish a documented human-in-the-loop process for any automated decision that produces legal effects on policyholders, including a clear escalation path and a mechanism for data subjects to contest decisions.
  • Breach response preparedness. Ensure that internal incident response plans can meet the 72-hour notification deadline to the PDPC, with particular attention to AI-related data leakage scenarios.
  • Cross-border transfer mechanism. For multinational groups, evaluate whether BCR certification—including the fast-track route—or SCCs provide the most efficient path for data transfers to group entities or reinsurers abroad.

Outlook

Thailand’s insurance sector faces a significantly more demanding compliance environment as PDPA enforcement matures and OIC alignment tightens. The convergence of stricter consent rules, expanded liability for intermediary conduct, new AI governance expectations, and a workable cross-border transfer framework means that insurers must move from reactive compliance to proactive data governance. Organizations that address these areas systematically—beginning with DPO registration, ROPA updates, and consent architecture—will be best positioned to manage regulatory risk and maintain the trust of their policyholders.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 27, 2024
Thailand’s National Cyber Security Committee (NCSC) released three notifications under the Cybersecurity Act on January 18, 2024, setting cybersecurity-related requirements for key organizations and assets. While one of these notifications already took effect, the two most notable will take effect on January 18, 2025 (i.e., one year from their publication in the Government Gazette). These two are the NCSC Notification Re: Standards for Defining the Security Category for Data or Information Systems B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Notification on Security Category”) and the NCSC Notification Re: Minimum Standards for Data and Information Systems B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Notification on Minimum Standards”). These notifications apply to: State agencies; Supervising or regulating organizations (i.e., state organizations, private organizations, or persons designated by law to regulate or supervise the affairs of state organizations or critical information infrastructure organizations); and Critical information infrastructure organizations (i.e., organizations related to or providing national security, significant public services, banking and finance, information technologies and telecommunications, transportation and logistics, energy and public utilities, and public health). Collectively these are defined as “Organizations” under the notifications. Notification on Security Category The Notification on Security Category sets forth risk-based security classifications—or “security categories”—for Organizations’ data or information systems. For security category assessment purposes, Organizations are required to perform a self-assessment of their data or information systems based on three key security objectives: confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Each of these objectives is further categorized into three risk levels (low, medium, and high), taking into account the assessment of potential impact in the following areas: Organizations’ financial value or reputation; Organizations’ number of service users; Organizations’ ability to perform their duties; State stability or public order. The risk levels for the three objectives are determined by considering whether there are “minimal,” “severe,” or “serious severe” effects, as described below: Confidentiality (not including data classified
February 2, 2024
The pervasive global issue of illicit personal data trading has extended its reach into Vietnam, where such sensitive information is being sold at minimal costs. A 2023 report from the Ministry of Public Security revealed that over two-thirds of the Vietnamese population has fallen victim to unlawful data collection and distribution. In the past two years, authorities have pressed charges on five criminal cases involving the buying and selling of billions of items of personal data, encompassing a wide range of sensitive information such as names, phone numbers, email addresses, and more. Notably, a person’s profile can be acquired for just USD 1, while profiles of millions of business customers can be obtained for a mere USD 100. Recognizing the severity of the problem, Vietnam has made serious efforts to combat illicit personal data trading by criminal means, encompassing both the legal framework and practical implementation.   Understanding the Criminal Legal Framework Vietnam’s 2015 Criminal Code, as amended in 2017, functions as a pivotal legal instrument delineating offenses and their corresponding punishments. Under Section 2 of Chapter XXI of the Criminal Code (“Offenses Against Regulations on Information Technology and Telecommunications Networks”), individuals engaging in the illicit trading of personal data, depending on the nature of the data (e.g., information about phone number, address, or—more dangerously—bank account) and the nature of the infringing acts, may be charged under different crimes. The sanctions can include monetary fines; non-custodial reform; imprisonment; and/or prohibition from holding certain positions, practicing certain professions, or doing certain jobs. For example, for the illicit trade of private information of an individual on a computer or telecommunications network, Article 288 of the Criminal Code specifies penalties including a monetary fine of up to VND 1 billion (equivalent to around USD 41,000); non-custodial reform of up to three years;
January 30, 2024
Thailand has made its draft Platform Economy Act (the “Draft PEA”) available to relevant entities in certain industries. The Draft PEA aims to regulate and standardize digital platform service business operations and protect consumers and other stakeholders. Once the Draft PEA becomes law, the Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses that are subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022) and the relevant provisions under the Electronic Transactions Act B.E. 2544 (2001), as amended, will cease to have effect. The key provisions of the Draft PEA are summarized below. Definitions The definitions of the key terms under the Draft PEA are substantially similar to the definitions of the key terms under the royal decree mentioned above. According to the Draft PEA, “digital platform services” refers to the provision of electronic intermediary services that manage data to facilitate connection, through computer networks, between business users, consumers, or users, regardless of whether remuneration is charged. Exemption The Draft PEA does not apply to digital platform services (DPSs) that are regulated by specific laws and have rules guaranteeing transparency and fairness, or that follow operational standards no less stringent than those required in the Draft PEA. Nonetheless, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) can request or link data relating to exempted DPSs from the relevant supervisory authorities. Extraterritorial Effect Offshore DPSs with certain characteristics are also subject to the obligations under the Draft PEA and will have to appoint a coordinating person in Thailand. However, offshore DPSs will not have to establish a business in Thailand. General Responsibilities and Obligations The Draft PEA sets out the following requirements: DPSs with (1) at least THB 100 million (approx. USD 2.8 million) in annual revenue from providing the DPSs in Thailand before deducting expenses, or (2) more than 10,000 monthly users
January 24, 2024
On 17 April 2023, the Vietnamese government issued the Personal Data Protection Decree, which is set to take effect 1 July 2023 without any transitional period. The PDPD is considered to be the first comprehensive document on data protection in Vietnam. Accordingly, it provides detailed regulations on the rights of data subjects, consent requirements and requirements for data processing impact assessments and outbound transfer impact assessments. In 2024, the adoption of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and the Law on Electronic Transactions will play a vital role regarding data protection. The LPCR will require traders to obtain consent to collect consumer data and establish a mechanism enabling consumers to select the information they consent to traders collecting. Consumers must also be allowed to express consent in a suitable form. For special processing purposes — such as sharing, disclosure, or transfer of personal data to third parties, and use of personal data to send advertisements and to introduce products — the LPCR requires a mechanism which enables data subjects to clearly opt in to give, or not give, their consent. This requirement is similar to procedures currently required for regulated stakeholders under the PDPD. In the same vein, the LET strictly forbids the acts of trading data to protect Vietnamese personal data. The government is anticipated to provide more details relating to data privacy guidelines after the issuance of the Draft Law on Telecommunications. Accordingly, the draft requires enterprises to provide the requisite information — such as service user’s name and address, number and location of transmitting or receiving servers, call times, IP address and other personal information supplied by the service user when entering a contract — to the relevant authority, as per a request which is made in accordance with the law. Amendments to Decree