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

January 30, 2024

Thailand Issues Draft Platform Economy Act

Subscribe to Updates

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 in Thailand (calculated from the average monthly usage pursuant to the rules of the ETDA) must report their operations to the ETDA within 30 days of becoming aware that they fall within either of the criteria.
  • Upon any changes in the name, type, channel, or other details of a DPS provider or the DPSs, or in the details of the local coordinator, the ETDA must be notified of the relevant information within 30 days from the date of the change. Any changes must also be included in an annual report due 60 days from the end of each calendar year for individuals or from the end of each fiscal year for legal entities.
  • DPS providers are responsible for the lawfulness of their users’ data and any other data transmitted through the DPS, unless it can be proved or evidence can be shown in court that the DPS acts only as an intermediary for the transmission of the data and does not store it, or that the DPS does not have access to the data.
  • DPSs that do not only act as intermediaries for the transmission of data, or for which the provider can access users’ data or other transmitted data, must implement a system, mechanism, or procedure enabling other persons to report illegal acts or noncompliance. Upon receiving such a report, the DPS must delete or block the illegal data. If the DPS determines that there is no illegal data or noncompliance, the finding must be promptly reported to the ETDA.
  • Measures for the alleviation of injuries, compensation, and remediation must be in place.

Additional Obligations for Certain DPSs

Additional obligations are imposed on two categories of DPSs that have specific characteristics.

A “specific type of DPS” is one that provides all of the following services:

  • Sending and receiving data of users and other persons;
  • Storing data of users and other persons; and
  • Matching different categories of users to facilitate electronic transactions or for the benefit of selling and purchasing goods or services through the DPS.

These specific types of DPSs are obligated to notify users of the laws relating to the purchasing of goods or services and the associated risks; implement a notification system for products that are required by law to have an expiry date; monitor and ensure that the DPS will not be used for illegal activities and immediately report any suspicious activities to the ETDA; implement an identity verification system; and submit an annual report to the ETDA on the DPSs’ transparency, among other obligations.

A “large DPS” is one that:

  • Has over THB 1 billion in annual revenue, before deducting expenses, from the provision of a DPS in Thailand;
  • Has over 100,000 monthly users in Thailand; or
  • Poses a high risk to Thailand’s economy and social stability, or a high risk of potential damage to the public.

Large DPSs are obligated to engage external experts to assess risks at least once a year; arrange for IT audits; appoint a chief compliance officer to liaise with the ETDA and other competent authorities; disclose factors and methods used for processing data to offer goods or services as well as the ranking of those goods or services; and implement channels to enable users to exercise the right not to receive advertisements, among other obligations.

DPS Cessation

In cases of DPS cessation, notification of the cessation must be made to the ETDA at least 60 days prior to the date of cessation. For large DPSs, the cessation notification must be submitted at least 120 days in advance, along with a plan and measures for taking care of users after the cessation. A DPS only ceases once a receipt of notification for the cessation has been issued by the competent official.

Blockage of the Transmission of Data

If there is a transmission of illegal data through a DPS, the ETDA may order that the transmission of data by or to a user be blocked. If the order is not complied with, the ETDA may file a petition with the court requesting an order to block the transmission of data on the DPS.

Whistleblowers and Trusted Flaggers

The ETDA has the duty to recruit, examine, and certify whistleblowers or trusted flaggers and announce the list of certified whistleblowers on its electronic channel. Providers of specific types of DPSs or large DPSs must collaborate with the whistleblowers on certain aspects, such as by having a channel for whistleblowers to register their accounts and so on.

Agreements between DPSs and Users

Operators must clearly declare terms and conditions to users before and during service usage, addressing certain required items such as terms of service, suspension or termination of services, and service fees.

Competition Supervision

The ETDA and the Office of Trade Competition Commission (OTCC) will collaboratively establish criteria for determining the list of gatekeeping platforms and will publish it within six months of the criteria coming into effect.

The ETDA and the OTCC may issue regulations on behaviors, service conditions, and any other activities that are deemed to be an unfair exercise of gatekeeping platforms’ business power (ex-ante regulations).

Next Steps

The Draft PEA will be disclosed for a hearing involving relevant stakeholders and the public before the first draft is finalized.

For more details on digital platform services in Thailand, or on other aspects of the country’s technology-related laws, please contact Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Gvavalin Mahakunkitchareon at [email protected], Pornpan Wichawut at [email protected], Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected], or Rada Lamsam at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 26, 2023
Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) organized a workshop with industry representatives on June 19, 2023, to discuss its future policy direction for over-the-top (OTT) telecom services and internet data center (IDC) and cloud computing services. OTT telecom services, in the MIC’s interpretation, are communication services such as text messages or voice calls provided over the internet—for example, the services of Zalo, WhatsApp, WeChat, etc. The workshop, the first in an expected series, focused only on the discussion of policy on how to regulate these services. Light-Touch Management Approach A very positive signal of the MIC in the workshop was its clear intention to apply a “light-touch” approach to management. For cross-border provision of OTT telecom services and IDC/cloud computing services, the MIC intends to require notification and a post-check mechanism, instead of a heavy licensing or commercial arrangement regime like the one applicable to traditional telecom services. In addition, there is no limitation on foreign investment if foreigners would like to provide these services in Vietnam. With regard to domestic service providers, the MIC proposes a registration regime with a similar post-check mechanism. The MIC’s reason for registration instead of notification is because the provision of these services by domestic companies may involve setting up data center/cloud systems which require consideration of various issues including location, electricity sources, and connection with telecom infrastructure such as marine cable. However, the MIC is also hoping to make the registration process as light as possible for enterprises (for example, using online registration) to provide a favorable environment and conditions to facilitate development of the industry without obstacles or cumbersome administrative procedures for companies’ operations. For providers of these services, the MIC is also considering an exemption from the responsibility to pay fees for telecommunications activities rights, and from payment to
Read More
June 8, 2023
At a conference organized by Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) on June 7, 2023, government officials provided more guidance on the recently issued Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD), which is set to take effect on July 1, 2023. Key takeaways included the following: A national portal on personal data protection for online submission of notifications and registrations will be launched before July 1, 2023. The MPS also plans to issue templates for data processing impact assessments (DPIAs) and transfer impact assessments (TIAs) in the near future. The PDPD requires data controllers, data processors, and data controller-processors to prepare a DPIA at the start of personal data processing. The MPS clarified that the DPIA is expected to be prepared and submitted once. Only changes to its content would require submission of an updated DPIA. Both DPIAs and TIAs (which are for cross-border data transfers) must be prepared in Vietnamese. Since the sale and purchase of personal data is strictly prohibited unless explicitly permitted by law, the MPS has handled approximately 14 cases involving unlawful trading of personal data, including sensitive data. Under the PDPD, sensitive data has a broader definition than under the GDPR (the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation), and also includes location data, creditworthiness, and personal financial data. Consent is not a legal basis for the trading of personal data, including sensitive data. The 72-hour timeline for responding to a data subject’s request does not mean 72 working or business hours. Rather, it means 72 actual consecutive hours. Any organization transferring the personal data of Vietnamese citizens outside of Vietnam must comply with the PDPD, regardless of the organization’s location. For organizations incorporated overseas that must comply with the PDPD, there is no requirement to appoint a local representative (unlike the GDPR)—but appointment of a data
Read More
June 2, 2023
In Southeast Asia, artificial intelligence (AI) products and services are being leveraged across industries such as finance, healthcare, retail, agriculture, and manufacturing. Governments across the region are recognizing the benefits of harnessing AI and the positive impact of AI technology on economic development. As the rise in AI deployment creates opportunities for economic growth in Southeast Asia, regulatory and digital governance efforts should focus on ethical, inclusivity, and cybersecurity concerns to help ensure that the widespread use of AI technology in the region is sustainable. Two jurisdictions in the region that have already made significant strides in developing initiatives surrounding AI are Singapore and Thailand. Singapore Due to its more advanced technological infrastructure, Singapore was one of the first countries in the region to address AI-related issues. Singapore has been aligning its data protection policies and regulations with the changing digital landscape since 2012—the year Singapore passed its Personal Data Protection Act. In 2019, Singapore unveiled its National AI Strategy to increase the use of AI technologies and deploy “scalable, impactful AI solutions in key verticals by 2030.” The goal is to align talent, regulation, and business growth to ensure AI applications serve society. Singapore’s approach is to facilitate innovation while safeguarding consumer interests, as it strives to become one of the regional leaders in the field of AI. In terms of Singapore’s regulatory landscape, Singapore’s Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) oversees data and AI, including AI developers and AI-using companies, which consist of backroom operations, front-end usage companies, and distributors of equipment with AI features. The Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) oversees all laws applicable to AI systems and decides on issues that impact the AI industry. Singapore has joined various bilateral and regional trade arrangements to facilitate research, development, and collaboration in support of its growing digital
Read More
May 24, 2023
The draft Royal Decree on Artificial Intelligence System Service Business, which was introduced by the Office of the National Digital Economy and Society Commission earlier for public comment in October last year, focuses on potential risks from artificial intelligence (AI) systems to public health, safety, and freedoms. The framework emphasizes the importance of risk assessment, reporting requirements, and the establishment of specific measures and criteria deemed necessary to minimize AI risks. AI Systems Defined by the Decree Under the draft royal decree, an AI system is defined as a machine-based system that can make predictions, recommendations, or decisions that affect real or virtual environments pursuant to the objectives set by humans. The definition clarifies that artificial intelligence systems are designed to operate at different levels of autonomy, including: machine learning AI; logic-based and knowledge-based AI; statistical AI; Bayesian estimation AI; and search and optimization AI. Risk-based Approach The draft AI royal decree takes a risk-based approach to regulation and specifically identifies prohibited or high-risk AI services that could cause harm or engage in unethical practices to ensure that AI systems do not pose major risks to public health, safety, or freedoms. The extent of regulatory scrutiny applied to an AI system corresponds to the level of risk presented by the AI system. For example, AI systems that pose unacceptable risks are generally prohibited, AI systems considered to be high-risk are subject to a conformity assessment, and AI systems considered to be limited-risk are subject to transparency requirements. Compliance with specified criteria and procedures to minimize potential risks of each AI service would be further outlined in subregulations. Prohibited AI Systems The draft AI royal decree prohibits AI systems that: employ subliminal techniques to covertly influence human behavior (below the threshold of conscious awareness); utilize social scoring; access sensitive personal
Read More