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​ 

July 14, 2023
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has issued new notifications amending regulations for payment businesses that fall under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) to promote transparency and good governance in the payment industry. Notification No. SorKorChor 2/2566 (“Notification 2”) increases the required qualifications for applicants seeking a license to provide payment services designated as being under the BOT’s supervision, and Notification No. SorKorChor 4/2566 (“Notification 4”) stipulates additional duties and exemptions for certain types of business operators. The notifications were published in the Government Gazette on July 7, 2023, and came into effect the following day. Additional Qualifications Notification 2 expands the list of prohibited characteristics for business operators applying for a license or registration to engage in a designated payment service, and their directors. For example, applicants must not have been ordered to suspend or cease their operations, and their registration or license to engage in financial business or operate a designated payment system or service must not have been revoked. The notification defines “financial business” as including financial institutions, credit card business, personal loan business, securities business, and so on. In addition, applicants’ directors and management must not have prohibited characteristics, such as being involved in the management of a financial business or designated payment system or service that was ordered to suspend or cease its operations. The applicable registration or license also must not have been revoked. Reporting Requirements During the application process, Notification 2 requires applicants to disclose information on shareholders and related parties (including spouses) who hold an aggregate 10 percent or more of the total paid-up shares. Notification 4 imposes this same reporting duty regarding shareholders and related parties but applies it to licensed operators in an ongoing manner. Existing payment service operators must make their first report of this information to
Read More
July 12, 2023
On June 30, 2023, Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) issued Circular No. 06/2003/TT-BTTTT to provide implementing guidelines for Decree 71 on editing, ratings, and warnings for video on demand (VOD) sports and entertainment content provided over radio and TV services. Circular 06 will take effect on August 15, 2023. Because Decree 71 allows VOD providers to self-edit and self-rate this type of content, it is important for them to know how the process is regulated in order to fully comply before providing VOD sports and entertainment programs to Vietnamese users. Under Circular 06, radio and TV service providers are required to display ratings and warnings on their programs, following the principles set out in the circular. These service providers must also compile dossiers in a stipulated form on the editing, ratings, and warnings of their programs for reporting to the authority and inspection. The main contents of Circular 06 are as follows. 1. Content Editing The main principles for editing VOD sports and entertainment programs include: Protection of children and other vulnerable people from inappropriate or potentially harmful content. Removal of all illegal/prohibited content, as well as content related to controversial issues or issues not recognized by Vietnamese law. Removal of content or dialogue that disparages the origins of others or makes fun of others’ physical weaknesses, and content that is contrary to Vietnamese culture, morality and fine customs and traditions; Removal of programs if it is discovered during the editing process that in the program or at the venue of the event, there are images or activities violating the prohibitions of the law, violating Vietnamese fine customs and traditions, or containing sensitive political elements. In addition to compliance with the above-mentioned principles, sports and entertainment programs related to health, education, and online gaming must additionally meet
Read More
July 11, 2023
Can computer programs resolve legal disputes? For decades, the answer from much of the legal community has been no. However, developments in artificial intelligence (AI), and in particular natural language processing and machine learning, have led to renewed discussions of this possibility. Increasingly, tools are being developed to assist parties with litigation outcome prediction and judges with litigation outcome determination. However, while some argue that the use of AI in legal disputes can reduce the length of proceedings, cut costs, and improve access to justice, others raise concerns that “black box” AI systems could reduce transparency, entrench bias, and harm the development of the law. Litigation Outcome Prediction The use of computers to predict the outcome of legal cases is not new. As early as the 1980s, researchers developed outcome prediction tools, often in the form of decision-tree algorithms. However, developments in AI have allowed the creation of more sophisticated prediction models. In 2017, a model built by Katz et al. predicted US Supreme Court decisions with an accuracy of 70.2%, while in 2019, a model built by Medvedeva et al. predicted decisions of the European Court of Human Rights with an accuracy of 75%. In various studies, AI tools have been able to predict case outcomes more accurately than expert lawyers. Companies such as Solomonic and Lex Machina, owned by LexisNexis, now provide commercial litigation prediction and analytics tools. Outcome prediction tools can be used by parties and their legal representatives to craft arguments and facilitate settlement negotiations, or by third-party litigation financers to assess the risk of providing funding. More broadly, outcome prediction may be used by the likes of insurance companies to help calculate claim payouts. However, those using such tools must take care to ensure that they do not breach any professional or legal obligations.
Read More
July 10, 2023
One of the more positive outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic is that telemedicine has become remarkably important as an interactive system between patients and healthcare professionals. Thailand, which ranks near the top as a world medical hub, is a highly favored destination in Asia for expat workers. Currently, the Thai market has both Thai-based and foreign-based platforms with information about healthcare providers and telemedicine readily available. “Doctor Locator,” “Weed Map,” and “Find a Teeth Aligner Dentist” are examples of online platforms connecting patients with medical and telemedicine services. These digital platforms provide information about the location of specialized clinics, cannabis dispensaries, pharmacy stores, and orthodontic practitioners in Thailand. These platforms act as intermediaries between medical care businesses and consumers. As actual medical services are not offered or provided, these digital platforms do not have to be regulated under the Medical Facility Act of Thailand. However, healthcare digital platform services that act as an intermediary or conduit managing information used to connect medical clinics or cannabis dispensaries with patients or customers via a computer network are now regulated under the soon-to-be-implemented Royal Decree on Digital Platforms, regardless of whether payment is actually made via the platform. The regulatory authority for this is the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA). Under this royal decree, digital platform providers that intend to operate a digital platform service must notify the ETDA prior to initiating operations. The extent of the details to be included in the notification to the ETDA will be more comprehensive if the digital platform: has annual revenue (before expenses) for digital platform services within Thailand exceeding THB 1.8 million (approx. USD 51,200) for an individual operator or THB 50 million (approx. USD 1.42 million) for a corporate or entity operator; or has more than 5,000 users (on average) per month. Apart
Read More