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 10, 2026

Thailand Issues Guidelines on Digital Platform Fee Transparency and Fairness

Thailand has introduced new regulatory guidance requiring digital platform operators to adopt structured, transparent, and fair fee practices. On March 16, 2026, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) published Announcement No. DPS 2/2569, titled “Guidelines for Transparency and Fairness in Digital Platform Service Fee Determination,” issued under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Business Operations B.E. 2565 (2022). The guidelines establish a framework governing how digital platform operators should set, disclose, and adjust fees charged to users and related service providers such as logistics and payment providers.

Although framed as best-practice guidance rather than legally binding rules with explicit penalties, the guidelines carry regulatory weight under the royal decree and represent a significant step toward structured governance of digital platform fee practices in Thailand.

The guidelines establish various transparency principles and divide fees into two distinct categories—compulsory and additional—with specific governance principles for each.

Transparency Principles

The guidelines recommend that digital platform operators adopt several transparency measures to ensure that users can fully understand the costs of using a platform.

  • Fee catalog. All fees should be consolidated into a single, accessible location, which should include the fee name, definition, scope of covered services, calculation methodology, rate, billing period, and calculation examples.
  • Minimum service disclosure. Operators should disclose the minimum service that users can expect, such as baseline visibility, product listing capabilities, access to transaction data, and back-end dashboard access.
  • Price structure disclosure. Operators should disclose the categories of costs underlying their fees, such as system maintenance, cybersecurity, and operational costs. While exact cost figures need not be made public, operators should be able to provide numerical data to regulators upon request.
  • Clear fee formulas. Fee calculations should be simple and easy to understand—for example, percentage of net sales, cost per order, or cost per product listing. Operators should avoid multilayered or stacked fee formulas that may mislead users.
  • Advance notice. Operators should notify users at least 15 days in advance of any fee change, disclosing the reason, scope, potential impact on users, and channels for inquiries and feedback.

Compulsory Fees

Compulsory fees cover services essential to basic platform operations, such as transaction processing, payment systems, identity verification, back-end systems, security, and basic customer service. Key recommendations include the following:

  • “1 activity = 1 fee” principle. Each fee should correspond to a clearly defined service scope, with no double-charging.
  • Cost-based logic. Fees should be justifiable by reference to cost categories, though detailed cost figures need not be publicly disclosed.
  • Minimum service guarantee. Users who pay compulsory fees are entitled to stable systems, baseline visibility, basic customer support, and access to essential data.
  • No conditional linkage. Basic rights should not be degraded if a user declines to purchase advertising or add-on services. For example, product visibility should not be reduced for users who do not purchase advertising.

Additional Fees

Additional fees include value-added services such as advertising, sales promotions, and subscription packages that enhance business performance beyond the baseline. Governance recommendations for additional fees include the following:

  • No impact on core benefits. Declining add-on services should not reduce baseline visibility or degrade basic system performance.
  • Value-based pricing. Fees should reflect measurable outcomes, such as impressions or search ranking improvement.
  • Optional, not mandatory. The purchase of add-on services should be voluntary, with no coercive bundling or pressure to purchase.
  • Unbundling principle. Basic and add-on services should not be mixed in ways that force users to purchase unnecessary bundles.

Common Principles for All Fee Types

Regardless of category, the guidelines recommend several overarching principles applicable to all fees:

  • Minimum service standards. Each fee type should be linked to clearly defined minimum service levels, including baseline data access, standard visibility, and appropriate service periods.
  • 15-day public consultation. Before any fee adjustment, operators should open a minimum 15-day consultation period, which should be accompanied by a summary of key issues, impacts, and the operator’s response to any feedback.
  • Fee challenge mechanism. Operators should maintain a formal process allowing users to dispute fees, with clear timelines, response procedures, and reasoning.
  • Fair exit. Cancellation procedures, especially for monthly or annual subscriptions, should be clear, reasonable, and free of excessive penalties.

Implications for Digital Platform Operators

Under the new guidelines, digital platform operators—particularly e-commerce marketplaces, food delivery apps, and similar intermediary platforms—may need to make significant operational and legal adjustments, and should review their current fee structures, disclosure practices, and terms of service for alignment with these guidelines. Key priorities include the following:

  • Preparing a consolidated fee catalog
  • Developing advance-notice and consultation procedures for fee changes
  • Implementing fee-dispute mechanisms
  • Ensuring internal cost-allocation records can be produced for regulators on request

In addition, the “1 activity = 1 fee” principle and unbundling requirements may force operators to unbundle existing combined fee packages and justify pricing with cost-based or value-based rationale. The prohibition on conditional linkage, such as suppressing product visibility for users who do not buy ads, directly limits a common monetization strategy and may affect revenue models.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 18, 2025
On April 12, 2025, Thailand published an amendment to the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes in the Government Gazette, with the regulation taking effect the following day. Drafts of the amendment had been shared in recent months, and the final amendment of the decree contains some additional key revisions, such as narrowing the business operators subject to the decree’s requirements, reducing operators’ obligations, and establishing collaboration between relevant stakeholders to tackle technology crime. These key revisions to the amendment are detailed below. Business operators subject to the decree: The business operators covered under the decree now include only payment service providers under the Payment System Act and digital asset operators under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses. Digital platform services under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Businesses That Are Subject to Prior Notification are no longer within the scope of the decree. Definition of technology crime: The final version of the amendment removed the expanded definition of technology crime that had been included in a previous draft, leaving the decree’s existing definition unchanged. Telecommunications provider obligations: Mobile and telecommunications service providers now have an obligation to monitor and screen for content that may be related to technology crime and suspend SIM cards when instructed to do so by the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC). Transaction and account suspension: The amendment removes the decree’s complex transaction suspension procedures and leaves room for business-specific regulators (e.g., Bank of Thailand, Securities and Exchange Commission, NBTC) to impose various technology crime suspension requirements on business operators under their supervision. The newly established Center for Prevention and Suppression of Technology Crimes can also notify financial institutions and business operators of names or digital asset wallet addresses that may be related to technology crime,
April 18, 2025
On April 12, 2025, Thailand issued an amended digital asset regulation that covers offshore digital asset businesses providing services on a cross-border basis to Thai users. These businesses will now be subject to the licensing requirements of the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Business Operations B.E. 2561 (2018), which is supervised by Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). A digital asset business will be deemed as providing services in Thailand—and therefore subject to requirements under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Business Operations—if the business does any of the following: Displays content in Thai, either fully or partially; Is registered under a “.th,” or “.ไทย” domain, contains any name relating to Thailand, or uses a domain written in Thai characters; Allows or requires payments in Thai baht (THB) or receives payments through Thai bank accounts or e-wallets; Chooses Thai law to govern transactions or Thai courts to litigate any dispute; Pays online search engines to attract users in Thailand to its services; Has an office, establishment, or personnel in Thailand to support or assist users within the country; or Meets any other criteria specified by the SEC. To operate legally in Thailand, offshore operators meeting any of the above criteria will be required to incorporate a local company in Thailand in order to apply for a digital asset business license with the SEC.
April 11, 2025
Vietnam’s draft Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) continues to evolve, with significant implications for businesses operating in the region. The latest draft, released to the public in March 2025, contains several noteworthy changes from the previous draft that businesses with operations in Vietnam should be aware of when developing their data protection strategies and compliance frameworks. The draft PDPL will be submitted to the vote of the National Assembly in May 2025 with a tentative entry into force on January 1, 2026. Key Changes in the Latest Draft PDPL 1. Redefined Categories of Personal Data The draft PDPL has made important revisions to personal data classifications: Basic personal data: An individual’s image is no longer classified as basic personal data. Sensitive personal data: Bank account information has been removed from this classification (and is now considered basic personal data), but two new categories have been added: (i) salary, allowances, and other income sources, and (ii) information on land users and information on land containing such information. Organizations should review their data classification schemes and update protection measures accordingly, particularly for salary and compensation information. 2. Data Encryption Requirements The draft PDPL explicitly states that encrypted data remains classified as personal data. Additionally, it mandates that sensitive personal data must be encrypted when stored, transmitted, received, or shared in cyberspace. Organizations and individuals can freely opt for one or more encryption solutions and encryption/decryption processes suitable for their personal data management and administration activities. 3. Biometric Data Processing The latest draft PDPL adds new protection requirements for biometric data. Organizations processing biometric data (such as fingerprints) must: Implement physical security measures for devices storing and transmitting biometric data. Use strong encryption methods during transmission and storage. Restrict access to biometric data. Have early-detection monitoring systems to detect violations of biometric
April 10, 2025
After making revisions to the initial draft notification released in November 2024, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released an updated draft Notification on Additional Obligations for Digital Platform Service Operators of Online Marketplaces for Goods with Specific Characteristics under Section 18(2) of the Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses Subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022) B.E. … . A focus group session was also held to gather feedback from business operators. Below is a summary of key provisions in the new draft. Unchanged Items Some key concerns that remain unchanged from the previous version of the draft notification include the following: Offshore business operators running online marketplaces that act as intermediaries for the sale or exchange of goods and provide facility services for the sale of goods (referred to as “specific marketplace operators” in the draft) are required to establish a local entity in Thailand. However, the criteria for determining which operators are specific marketplace operators are still under discussion due to feedback from business operators. Specific marketplace operators must submit a compliance report to the ETDA along with their annual report each year. Specific marketplace operators must verify that “business users” (e.g., merchants) provide complete details about goods in accordance with product standardization requirements. Removed Obligations The updated draft notification has removed specific marketplace operators’ obligations to: Conduct Identity Assurance Level 2 (IAL2) verification of business users before onboarding them on their platforms. Submit a registry of business users’ information to the ETDA. Retain business users’ information for a specified retention period. Implement measures to filter reviews of products subject to specific standards. Revisions Key revisions made to the draft notification include the following: The effective date has been extended to 120 days after the notification’s publication in the Government Gazette,