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

October 25, 2023

Thailand Issues New Regulation on Prepaid Telecom Service Fee Collection

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand has released a notification adding new consumer protection provisions related to the collection of prepaid telecom service fees and combining several disparate regulations and resolutions. The Notification on the Criteria Relating to the Collection of Prepaid Telecommunications Service Fees was issued on September 4, 2023, and came into effect on September 21, 2023.

The notification will be enforced as a general regulation and guideline for all telecom services other than fixed broadband services, which already fall under a comparable regulation.  

Previously, Thailand’s National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) had issued several regulations to regulate the collection of prepaid telecom service fees. These include the NBTC Notification on Contract Standards, the NBTC Notification on the Maximum Service Fee Rate and Collection of Prepaid Telecommunications Service Fees, and the NBTC Notification on the Criteria Relating to the Collection of Prepaid Fixed High-Speed Broadband Service Fees. These are now subsumed by the new notification.

Key requirements of the new notification on prepaid telecom fee collection are described below.

Collection Approval Requirement

Before collecting prepaid telecom service fees, service providers (SPs) must apply to the NBTC for approval by submitting the required forms and supporting documents. Changes to the criteria and methods of prepaid telecom service fee collection must also be reapproved. This provision aims to protect against fraud and money-laundering transactions.

The NBTC will consider whether to approve an SP’s proposal for the maximum period to be covered by the prepaid service fees on a case-by-case basis.

After the collection criteria and methods are approved by the NBTC, SPs must inform their users individually. SPs must also report to the NBTC by the 15th of every month after receiving the NBTC’s approval to collect prepaid service fees.

Approvals of prepaid service fee collection granted by the NBTC prior to the new notification are still effective, but SPs must obtain new approval for any changes or differences from the previously approved collection criteria and methods.

Consumer Protection

The new notification also includes several provisions aimed at protecting users of prepaid telecom services:

  • SPs must not set a time limit before which users have to complete their use of a prepaid telecom service except when approved by the NBTC, which may set conditions relating to transfers of remaining value, refunds of excess service fees, minimum terms for using the service, or registration of users’ names and addresses.
  • SPs must allow users to choose between prepaid and postpaid telecom service fee collection via similar channels, and must allow them to change their choice. If the service conditions prevent the collection of service charges after service usage or the end of the billing cycle, or if it creates an undue burden on the users, SPs may ask the NBTC for its approval to offer only postpaid collection. To obtain NBTC approval, SPs must justify their request with supporting evidence.
  • Any rewards or discounts offered to users for choosing prepaid collection must be reasonable, fair, and in proportion to the period for collecting the prepaid fee. SPs must inform users of the exact value of the rewards or discounts before they enter into service contracts.
  • SPs must set the service charges for prepaid services before giving rewards or discounts in a manner that does not differ significantly from the service charges for postpaid services with similar quality, volume, and service standards offered or provided in the market.
  • When collecting any other charges as specified in the service contract for both prepaid or postpaid services, SPs must inform users of the objective of collecting the charges and specify each charge separately in the telecom service statement. For example, if an SP charges a telecom service user for telecom equipment installation, the statement from the SP must show the installation charge as a separate item from the telecom service.

Refunds and Returns

The new notification on prepaid telecom fee collection assigns obligations to both SPs and users in relation to termination of a telecom service contract or change or cancellation of a service package.

In such a case, SPs must refund the prepaid service fee and any remaining unused balance, including VAT, in proportion to the remaining unused service. The SP must notify the user when the refund is complete.

To receive a refund from an SP, users must return any reward or discount received from the SP in proportion to the service that has already been used. However, if the cause of termination, change, or cancellation is the SP’s fault, the user does not need to return the reward or discount.

SPs must obtain approval from the NBTC regarding the details of service fee refunds and reward and discount returns before proceeding with prepaid collection.

For more information on the NBTC notification, or on any aspect of telecom activities in Thailand, please contact Charuwan Charoonchitsathian at [email protected], Napassorn Lertussavavivat at [email protected], or Nitcharat Siraprapasiri at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 9, 2026
As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities. The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data. Structure of the Consultation Process According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases: Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA. Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations. Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder
Read More
April 3, 2026
On March 16, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security released a draft version of a new Decree on the Prevention and Combating of Cybercrime and High-Tech Crime to replace the currently effective Decree 25/2014/ND-CP. In the draft, the ministry has proposed a comprehensive regulatory framework aimed at addressing violations occurring within the cybersecurity domain, including measures related to intellectual property. Acts of Online IP Infringement Article 9 of the draft decree notably introduces specific provisions addressing online intellectual property infringement, with detailed lists of acts considered to constitute infringement in the online environment. Copyright and related rights infringement includes: Uploading or sharing works, performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcasts, computer programs, software, research, documents, theses, or other intellectual creations on digital platforms without the consent of the rights holder. Unauthorized livestreaming of copyrighted television programs, sporting events, or artistic performances. Uploading, sharing, storing, transmitting, or providing links to infringing works or digital content via websites, social networks, applications, or digital platforms. Providing or using software, tools, devices, or access codes to circumvent technological protection measures or evade lawful control mechanisms implemented by rights holders. Using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to replicate the ideas or structure of another person’s work without significant new creativity or without proper attribution, thereby causing damage to the original author. Industrial property infringement includes: Manufacturing, trading, advertising, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing counterfeit trademarks, geographical indications, or industrial designs, as well as goods infringing industrial property rights through online platforms. Unauthorized registration, appropriation, or use of domain names, account names, or digital identifiers that create confusion regarding the rights holder or the origin of goods or services. Producing, using, or offering for sale products containing all or part of a patented invention via online platforms. Advertising or introducing products with technical features or characteristics identical
Read More
April 3, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established a comprehensive governance framework for the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) in the capital markets. The framework provides guidance to capital market business operators on understanding the risks associated with AI/ML implementation and adopting appropriate practices to build public confidence in Thailand’s capital markets. While the guidelines are principle-based rather than prescriptive, they reflect the SEC’s expectations for responsible AI/ML governance and are likely to inform supervisory activities and industry standards going forward. Scope The framework applies to capital market business operators supervised by the SEC. This includes, for example, securities and derivatives firms, asset management companies, mutual fund and private fund managers, investment advisors and investment consultants (including robo-advisory service providers), derivatives intermediaries, and other licensed intermediaries and market operators in the Thai capital markets that deploy AI/ML in their operations. Core Principles of the Guidelines The framework is presented as a best-practice manual rather than prescriptive regulation, providing guidance that regulated entities may apply to their AI/ML governance and risk management as appropriate. While currently nonbinding, the guidelines signal the SEC’s expectations for the sector, particularly in relation to other binding SEC regulations such as those covering IT risk management and market conduct. The guidelines name four core principles for AI/ML deployment: Fairness: Design and develop AI/ML with consideration for fairness, equality, and social diversity to prevent discrimination against individuals or groups. Legal and ethical compliance: Ensure AI/ML use aligns with applicable laws, ethical standards, and organizational values and policies. Accountability: Establish clear responsibility—both internally and externally—for AI/ML activities and outcomes. Transparency: Provide adequate disclosure to users about AI/ML use, including explainability of decisions and traceability of activities. AI/ML Best Practices The guidelines prescribe best practices across four stages of the AI/ML lifecycle, as described below.
Read More
April 2, 2026
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
Read More