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​ 

March 16, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has broadened the definition of institutional investors, expanded the types of qualifying investments, and updated financial qualification thresholds for various investor categories through a revised notification on the definitions of institutional investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. The amended framework, which came into force on March 1, 2026, adds digital asset business operators, investment planners, and investment consultants to the roster of entities recognized as institutional investors, and broadens the definition of investment to account for digital tokens. Expanded Definition of Institutional Investors Under the SEC’s revised notification, the category of institutional investors now expressly includes digital asset business operators licensed under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018). This addition recognizes the growing role of digital asset platforms and service providers in Thailand’s investment ecosystem and aligns the regulatory treatment of digital markets with that of traditional markets. The definition of institutional investors now also encompasses investment planners and investment consultants approved by the SEC. Previously, only SEC-approved investment analysts held this status; the expansion covers a broader scope of professionals who possess comparable expertise and experience in evaluating investment opportunities. Broadened Investment Definition The revised framework now defines investment to mean direct or indirect investment in a wider range of assets beyond deposits. Specifically, the definition covers: Securities under the Securities and Exchange Act Derivatives under the Derivatives Act Investment tokens offered to the public Government-issued digital tokens (G-tokens) as specified in a separate SEC notification This expansion ensures that financial status assessments reflect the full spectrum of an investor’s holdings, including emerging digital assets. Updated Financial Qualification Thresholds The amended SEC notification also provides updated qualification thresholds for angel investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. While the core criteria
Read More
March 13, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) has undergone continuous amendment in recent years, with the latest amendment issued at the end of 2025. Among the amended and supplemented provisions, the regulation that has perhaps attracted the most attention is a provision relating to the use of protected IP objects by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Specifically, Article 7 of the 2025 IP Law introduces a completely new Clause 5, which reads in full as follows: “Organizations and individuals are permitted to use texts and data relating to intellectual property objects that have been lawfully published, and which the public is allowed to access, for the purposes of scientific research, experimentation, and training of artificial intelligence systems, provided that such use will not unreasonably affect the legitimate rights and interests of the authors and intellectual property rights holders in accordance with this Law. With respect to texts and data that are objects protected by copyright and related rights, the use of the texts and data as set forth herein must also be in accordance with the regulations of the Government.” Analyzing this newly added provision in the context of how it was conceived, as well as the challenges that still lie ahead, can provide some interesting insights. From Aspirations to Flight in Science and Technology From the end of 2024 and throughout 2025—the 50th anniversary of the country’s reunification—Vietnam witnessed numerous sweeping changes in many areas, including legislative development. It could be said that no sessions of the National Assembly have ever adopted as many laws, resolutions, and major policies as this one. The aspirations of the highest-level leadership have been concretized into major law and policy projects, which were drafted, developed, and passed at record speed. All of this was aimed at building a foundation for Vietnam to achieve
Read More
March 12, 2026
Thailand’s AI legislative framework took another step forward when the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) issued a notification establishing guidelines for AI-generated advertising that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification, which is already in effect, was issued under the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979) and its amendments, which prohibit advertising that is unfair to consumers or may cause harm to society, including false or exaggerated statements and statements that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification addresses emerging advertising practices, including the use of images edited using software or AI to attract consumer interest or build credibility. The OCPB noted that such advertising may result in consumers misunderstanding the essential characteristics, condition, or usage of products, which violates consumer rights and causes damage. Key Requirements on AI-Generated or Digitally Manipulated Advertising Content For advertisements using still images or videos created or edited with software programs or AI tools that may cause the depicted product or service to differ from the actual product sold or service provided—which may cause misunderstanding regarding the condition, quality, quantity, or other essential aspects of the products or services—advertisers and business operators must comply with the following requirements: Prior authorization. Obtain approval from relevant regulatory authorities where required by law. Accurate representation. Ensure that the advertised size, quantity, volume, number, or composition matches the actual product or service being sold, whether in still images or videos. Mandatory AI disclosure labels. Display clear disclosures when AI or software is used to create or edit images, such as: “Real image or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual location or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual product or edited simulation” “Image created by AI” “Video created by AI” Clarity of disclosure. Ensure disclosures are clearly visible,
Read More
March 10, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets. Expanded Definition Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder. Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder. First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier
Read More