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

March 30, 2026

Thailand Issues New Competition Guidelines for Multi-Sided and E-commerce Platforms

Subscribe to Updates

On March 24, 2026, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) published its long-anticipated Guidelines on Multi-Sided Platforms and E-Commerce Businesses in the Government Gazette, following the conclusion of a public hearing conducted last year. The guidelines entered into force on March 25, 2026, and significantly expand the application of Thai competition law to digital platform ecosystems.

These rules introduce targeted restrictions on platform conduct, such as price-ranking algorithms and tying and bunding, that leverages network effects, and will have far-reaching implications across Thailand’s digital economy—affecting not only platform operators but also platform participants, including sellers, logistics providers, advertisers, and payment service providers operating on or alongside such platforms.

The guidelines clarify how existing prohibitions under the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA)—including abuse of market dominance, cartel conduct, and unfair trade practices—apply in the context of platform-based business models. While many provisions reflect earlier draft guidelines, the final version delivers more precise definitions and clearer enforcement parameters, increasing regulatory certainty while also raising compliance expectations.

Applicability

The guidelines introduce core definitions that determine their coverage:

  • Multi-sided platform: A platform that acts as an intermediary connecting two or more groups of users, enabling them to have direct interaction in order to exchange or rely on services from one another. Examples include digital platforms for trading goods or services (e-commerce), as defined below.
  • Digital platform for trading goods or services (e-commerce): A platform that acts as an intermediary connecting the distribution, purchase, sale, or exchange of goods or services. This includes operations carried out to facilitate transactions or interactions between business operators through an electronic transaction system, regardless of whether a service fee is charged.
  • Operator of a digital platform business for trading goods or services: A provider of digital platform services for trading goods or services, as described above, operating by receiving purchase orders for goods or services transacted via electronic systems, whether in the form of an electronic marketplace, social media marketplace, or any other format that connects purchase orders for business operators’ goods or services through an electronic system.

The scope of the guidelines is intentionally broad and extends to sellers, carriers, digital media advertisers, payment channels, and platform operators that use algorithms to rank, match, or display goods or services.

Restriction of Practices

The guidelines do not adopt a per se illegality standard but rather apply a rule-of-reason principle to various price-related practices and other conduct, as described below. The conduct may still be acceptable—or in other words, not considered unfair or unreasonable—if it meets specific criteria for exemption, such as being supported by sound economic, business, or technological reasoning, or aligning with established trade practices and market customs intended to enhance or maintain competition.

The conduct must not significantly harm overall market competition, nor should it result in excessive restriction, distortion, or the imposition of an unfair burden on other business operators. Regulatory assessment may also take into account external factors such as contractual relationships and other legal limitations.

Price-Related Practices Under Scrutiny

The price-related practices now within the TCCT’s enforcement focus include:

  • Below-cost pricing: Setting prices for goods or services below their total average cost, including charging fees, expenses, or other benefits at a rate lower than the average total cost.
  • Predatory pricing: Charging fees, expenses, or other benefits at a rate lower than the average variable cost from sellers, carriers, digital media advertisers, and payment channels with the objective of foreclosing competitors. Predatory pricing requires demonstrable or foreseeable recoupment to offset previous losses and maximize long-term profits.
  • Rate parity clauses: Requiring sellers to match the platform’s prices across other channels or preventing sellers from offering lower prices elsewhere.
  • Resale price maintenance: Dictating the resale price at which sellers offer goods or services.
  • Refusal to deal: Refusing to deal with sellers who do not comply with specified pricing requirements.
  • Excessive or unreasonable pricing: Charging commissions, advertising fees, logistics fees, promotional fees, or payment-processing fees that are not reasonably justified or proportionate.
  • Price discrimination: Charging different prices or fees to similarly situated sellers or service providers.
  • Price-ranking algorithms: Using algorithms that systematically prioritize or deprioritize goods or services based on pricing in a manner that harms fair competition.

Nonprice Conduct Under Scrutiny

The guidelines also impose extensive restrictions on nonprice conduct common in platform operations, including:

  • Visibility reductions: Lowering the search ranking or display prominence of sellers’ products.
  • Self-preferencing: Favoring the platform’s own goods or services over third-party offerings.
  • Exclusionary conduct toward carriers: Refusing to allow goods delivery by seller-chosen carriers or setting default carrier assignments that prevent sellers from selecting alternative logistics providers.
  • Mandatory sales promotions: Compelling participation in sales promotion activities for an extended and continuous period, such as recurring monthly “double-date” sales promotions.
  • Mandatory payment channels: Requiring the use of payment services provided or designated exclusively by the platform.
  • Coercion to purchase: Requiring the purchase or use of any services without reasonable justification—such as utilizing a designated media advertiser.
  • Exclusive dealing arrangements: Requiring sellers to list or sell goods exclusively through the platform, or prohibiting sellers from offering products on competing platforms.
  • Refusal to deal: Banning seller accounts, delisting products, or refusing to transact with sellers.
  • Restriction of alternatives: Forcing sellers to purchase unrelated services or agree to unrelated contract terms as a condition of platform access (tying and bundling), anticompetitive use of third-party data, limiting seller choice and delisting carriers
  • Discrimination: Ranking discrimination and quantity discrimination against certain carriers.
  • Abusive data leveraging: Using competitively sensitive data obtained from third-party sellers to benefit the platform’s own competing products.
  • Self-preferencing through data use: Exploiting proprietary data to advantage the platform’s offerings.
  • Collusive conduct: Platforms colluding with one another on competitive terms, including keyword-bidding collusion.

Next Steps

The TCCT has enforcement authority to investigate, issue cease-and-desist orders, and impose penalties for violations. Platform operators and participants should review their commercial terms, algorithms, pricing policies, and contractual arrangements to ensure compliance with the new restrictions. Companies should also consider conducting internal compliance assessments and seeking legal guidance to address any potentially problematic practices before enforcement actions commence.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Antitrust and Competition

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

November 7, 2025
Thailand and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) titled “Cooperation to Diversify Global Critical Minerals Supply Chains and Promote Investments” on October 26, 2025, signaling a new strategic alignment aimed at developing Thailand’s mineral sector, particularly in rare earth elements (REEs). The MOU has implications for investments in technology, manufacturing, and other related sectors. This update outlines the key provisions of the MOU and the potential opportunities and legal navigating points for businesses. Objectives The primary driver of this agreement is the US initiative to diversify global supply chains for critical minerals and reduce reliance on current market leaders, particularly China. For Thailand, it represents a major opportunity to attract high-tech investment and develop its downstream processing industries. The cooperation is set to focus on five main areas: Technical knowledge: Exchange of technical expertise and international best practices to strengthen Thailand’s mining and processing sector. Joint cooperation: Establishing workshops, seminars, and scientific collaboration to boost innovation. Regulatory practice: Promoting good governance and streamlining regulatory and licensing procedures. Information sharing: Sharing data on potential projects and global market prices. Full-value chain: The MOU covers the entire mineral lifecycle, from exploration and extraction to processing, refining, and recycling. “First Opportunity to Invest” Clause The most debated provision within the MOU states that “participants expect to have the first opportunity to invest . . . in critical minerals assets that may be sold in Thailand.” Business implications: This clause is widely interpreted as granting US companies a first look or preferential access to investment opportunities in Thailand’s critical minerals sector. This could be a significant advantage for US-based or affiliated companies in mining, technology, and energy seeking to secure a foothold in a developing REE supply chain. Thai government position: Thai officials, including the prime minister, have publicly clarified
Read More
October 31, 2025
On September 29, 2025, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC Office) published its Regulations on the Review and Certification of Binding Corporate Rules B.E. 2568 (2025) (the Regulations). The Regulations provide clarity on the PDPC Office’s approach to reviewing and certifying binding corporate rules (BCRs) under Section 29 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), and aim to facilitate international data transfers within a group of undertakings or enterprises (a “corporate group”). In conjunction with this development, the PDPC Office also approved BCRs for two companies operating in Thailand on September 30, 2025. This milestone represents the first concrete progress since the PDPC’s Notification on Criteria for the Protection of Personal Data Sent or Transferred to a Foreign Country pursuant to Section 29 of the PDPA B.E. 2566 (2023) came into effect in March 2024. Some key features of the Regulations are set out below. Categorization of BCRs BCRs are classified into two types: (1) BCRs for Controllers (BCR-C) and (2) BCRs for Processors (BCR-P). The category must be clearly specified when submitting the BCRs to the PDPC Office. Documentation Requirement The applicant must prepare and submit the application (a standard template may be provided by the PDPC Office in the future) along with supporting documents for review and certification in the Thai language. If the supporting documents are in a foreign language, a certified Thai translation should be provided. The translation must be notarized by a notary public or qualified person. Supporting documents may include, among others, a binding instrument such as an intra-group agreement, or a list of entities subject to the BCRs. Expedited Process Requirement Organizations with existing BCR approvals under the EU or UK GDPR, or from countries announced by the PDPC under Section 28, may apply through an
Read More
October 26, 2025
AI-generated songs are now making waves in Vietnam on platforms like TikTok, with tracks such as “Say mot doi vi em” quickly gaining popularity and sparking widespread attention. This phenomenon raises a host of legal and ethical questions: Who is the author of these songs? Can they be protected by copyright? Who is responsible if there is an infringement? These questions are becoming increasingly urgent as AI music becomes more mainstream in Vietnam. Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Music in Vietnam Under current Vietnamese law, copyright protection is reserved for works that bear the mark of human creativity. The 2022 amendments to Vietnam’s Intellectual Property Law reaffirm that only works created by humans are eligible for copyright. In practice, if a human meaningfully contributes to the creative process—by providing prompts, making selections, editing, or arranging—their contribution may be protected. However, if a song is generated entirely by AI without significant human input, it is unlikely to qualify for copyright protection. When an AI-generated song does not qualify for copyright protection, the question arises as to whether the person who writes the prompts, edits, or compiles the work can still be considered the owner of an asset under the Vietnamese Civil Code. According to Article 105 of the Civil Code 2015, assets include objects, money, valuable papers, and property rights. While AI-generated music that is not protected by copyright is not considered money or valuable papers, it may be regarded as an object (in the form of a digital file or recording) or as a property right if it can be possessed, used, transferred, or exploited for value. Use of AI-Generated Works Without Copyright Protection If a song is not protected by copyright, does that mean anyone can use it freely? Not necessarily. The absence of copyright does not mean the
Read More
October 3, 2025
On September 26, 2025, the Contract Committee under Thailand’s Consumer Protection Board issued a regulation that aims to standardize contracts and enhance consumer protection within the beauty and wellness industry. The Notification on Prescribing the Beauty Service Business as a Contract-Controlled Business B.E. 2568 (2025), which takes effect on January 24, 2026, requires business operators to use a prescribed standard contract in Thai and adhere to strict mandatory provisions and prohibitions. These regulations apply to operators across all in-person and online service channels, including via digital platforms. “Beauty services business” is defined as the provision of services under an agreement allowing consumers to receive a series of treatments, either over a set number of sessions or within a set period. This includes massage, spa, other methods for cleanliness, beauty, or care of facial or body skin, and weight control and body shaping—including services offered electronically. The law excludes surgery, liposuction, and medical treatments performed by licensed practitioners. The notification establishes the following key requirements: Mandatory contract and formatting. All contracts with consumers must use the standard contract form, in Thai, with clear, readable text (minimum font size of 2 millimeters, no more than 11 characters per inch), and include all essential terms from the annexed form. Contract execution. Contracts must be made in duplicate, with one copy given to the consumer at signing. For agreements concluded through electronic channels, the process must comply with the Electronic Transactions Act and use the same required terms. Digital platforms. Business operators who provide services facilitated through a digital platform as an intermediary are ultimately responsible for ensuring the consumer receives a compliant contract. Prohibited clauses. The law prohibits clauses that limit or exclude liability for damages to life, body, health, mind, or property resulting from breach of contract or a wrongful act;
Read More