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​ 

June 23, 2026
On May 26, 2026, Thailand’s Department of Land Transport (DLT) published for public consultation a draft amendment to the Ministerial Regulation on Electronic Ride-Hailing Vehicles that would, for the first time, allow juristic persons (legal entities) to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars—a right that currently belongs exclusively to natural persons, limited to one person per one vehicle. If finalized in its current form, the regulation would significantly expand the supply side of Thailand’s ride-hailing market by enabling corporate fleet operators to enter the space. The public comment period is open through June 24, 2026. Key Principles Under the Draft Regulation Under the proposed amendment, juristic persons that maintain a fleet of at least 50 vehicles will be permitted to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars. This represents a fundamental shift from the current framework, which restricts registration to individual natural persons on a one-person-one-car basis. Vehicle Specifications Corporate-owned ride-hailing vehicles must meet the following requirements: Be brand new from the factory, or no more than two years old from first registration with no more than 20,000 km of use. Not be a vehicle that has been reconstructed or repaired after involvement in a serious accident affecting safety—a standard consistent with public transport vehicles (RorYor. 6). Be classified as small, medium, or large in accordance with ministerial or director-general specifications. The vehicles may be equipped with safety devices such as interior or exterior cameras (video/photo recording) and can retain the original factory color of the vehicle body (no mandatory color change is required). License Plates Corporate ride-hailing vehicles will use license plates of the same size, characteristics, and color as those for private passenger vehicles not exceeding seven seats (RorYor. 1), rather than public transport plates. Potential Impact The government has stated that the regulation is intended to: Promote
Read More
June 23, 2026
On May 14, 2026, Thailand published a ministerial regulation in the Government Gazette to prescribe measures for prevention and suppression of technology crimes. The regulation creates a comprehensive procedural framework for returning money and digital assets to victims of technology crimes. It will take effect 90 days after publication (in mid-August 2026), giving affected entities a limited window to prepare. Mandatory Reporting Obligations for Financial Institutions When a deposit account, e-money account, or digital asset wallet is frozen in connection with a technology crime, the relevant financial institution or business operator must report transaction data to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) via AMLO’s designated electronic system. Required data elements include account numbers (sender and receiver), names, identification or passport numbers, legal entity registration numbers, phone numbers, remaining balance, damage amount, transaction reference numbers, and the bank case ID. Institutions that already share data through the information-sharing system under the emergency decree are deemed to have satisfied this reporting obligation, creating an incentive for platform participation. When the Royal Thai Police or the Department of Special Investigation seize or freeze assets related to technology crimes, they must provide AMLO with investigation reports, complaint evidence, money-trail data, and account statements. Notification and Claims Process Once the AMLO secretary-general approves verified reports of a technology crime, the account information of persons connected to the crime will be published in the Government Gazette, triggering a 90-day window for victims to file claims and for related persons to file objections. Officers will also publish details on AMLO’s electronic media and send registered mail to identified victims, which will be deemed received after 7 days domestically or 15 days internationally. Victims have 90 days from the date the crime is published in the Government Gazette to file claims through AMLO’s electronic system. Claims must include
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More