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

September 27, 2017

Thailand: New Payment Systems Act

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand is in the process of reforming laws related to payment systems and services, as well as consolidating several overlapping laws that regulate electronic money businesses, with the National Legislative Assembly approving the new Payment Systems Act in August 2017. The new draft of the bill is awaiting royal assent and is expected to be published in the Government Gazette within this year, becoming effective 180 days after its publication.

Under the current system, a business that wishes to provide a certain type of e-money service is required to apply for two licenses, in accordance with two laws: (1) the Royal Decree Regulating Electronic Payment Services B.E. 2551 (2008); and (2) the Notification of the Ministry of Finance: Business that Requires a Permit according to Section 5 of the Notification of the Revolution Council No. 58 (Electronic Money Card Businesses), dated October 4, 2004. Once the new Payment Systems Act comes into force, it will simplify procedures for business operators by repealing these laws.

Under the new law, different types of electronic payment systems and businesses will be reclassified into three new classifications: (1) important e-payment systems; (2) supervised e-payment systems; and (3) supervised e-payment services. Criteria for supervised e-payment systems and e-payment services will be determined in ensuing subordinate legislation by the Minister of Finance, based on recommendations from the Bank of Thailand (BOT). 

Current business operators will be required to reapply for registrations or licenses if their businesses fall within the category of a supervised e-payment system or a supervised e-payment service. Certain new businesses that fall under either category may be required to apply for registration, rather than applying for a license (e.g., new businesses utilizing new financial technology that are in the process of being tested, or providing services to a limited number of customers which may not significantly impact public interests).

The BOT will be the key regulator of the new Payment Systems Act and will supervise the operation of payment systems and payment services, with the Electronic Transactions Commission supervising information technology security standards. The law grants the BOT the authority to announce rules and regulations relating to: 

  • minimum financial status and performance;
  • business operation standards;
  • good governance;
  • risk management;
  • outsourcing;
  • collection and disclosure of a customer’s personal data;
  • customer protection; and
  • security systems. 

Business operators and their management will be required to submit financial statements, operations reports, accounts, and data relating to the business operations, in any form, with the BOT having the authority to examine business operations, assets, and debts of business operators. In the case of noncompliance, the BOT may order business operators to rectify any associated problems, or it may impose a temporary suspension or cessation order within a specified period. Noncompliant business operators may be subject to administrative fines of up to THB 3 million, and criminal penalties that include imprisonment of up to 10 years and/or fines of up to THB 10 million.

Reformation of the payment systems law in Thailand will result in more streamlined license application and compliance obligations for business operators, as well as the establishment of an effective regulatory framework to support the development of e-payment services and businesses under the government’s “Thailand 4.0” policy.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 6, 2026
Thailand’s Legislation Consideration Committee of the Ministry of Interior has ruled that in-game loot boxes in online games do not constitute gambling under the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935). This first-of-its-kind ruling provides useful guidance for online game operators and digital entertainment companies operating in Thailand. Background The ruling came in response to an inquiry concerning an online role-playing game operator that launched a campaign featuring a loot box mechanism. The mechanism allowed players to purchase a token in exchange for the opportunity to receive a virtual loot box containing randomized in-game items. The key features of this were as follows: The items received were digital, noncash items usable only within the game. The items could not be exchanged, redeemed, or converted into cash with the game operator. Items may differ in rarity but remain purely virtual. The central question was whether paying money to obtain randomized in-game items constituted a risk-based activity involving the chance to receive money or property of monetary value, which would constitute gambling under the Gambling Act. Committee Ruling The committee reached the following conclusions regarding the characteristics of the game’s loot-box mechanism: No cash or monetary equivalent: Players did not receive cash or property that could be exchanged for cash. The in-game items were merely usage rights within the online game ecosystem. No real-world monetary valuation: There was no determination of item value in real currency, and no mechanism for redeeming or converting items into money with the game operator. Any off-platform trading of in-game items between players is irrelevant to online game operators, as any value arising from such transactions is determined by the market rather than by the operators themselves. Service fee characterization: Payments made by players purchasing in-game loot boxes constituted fees for online game services. Accordingly, the committee concluded
Read More
March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More
February 26, 2026
Thailand is preparing to offer new tools for intellectual property enforcement as the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) recently released for public consultation a draft notification requiring social media platforms to verify user identities and conduct know-your-customer (KYC) checks on advertisers. The draft Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers, which is to be issued under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023), as amended in 2025, primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes. However, its new obligations also provide IP owners with valuable tools to identify anonymous infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The draft notification imposes several verification requirements on social media platforms operating in Thailand. These requirements also strengthen IP rights holders’ ability to identify anonymous infringers, as platforms must: Verify user identities through registered phone numbers and link all accounts to verifiable identities. Conduct KYC checks on advertisers, including individuals, companies, and any third-party payers. Perform heightened identity checks for high-risk or repeat offenders before publishing advertisements. Promptly remove content flagged by the Anti-Technology Crime Division and prescreen advertisements for prohibited or high-risk content. How IP Owners Can Use This Notification for Enforcement The phone number–based verification requirement enables IP owners to work more effectively with enforcement authorities in tracing individuals or entities responsible for infringing content. The comprehensive advertiser KYC obligations, including mandatory disclosure of third-party payment sources, create a clear audit trail even when bad actors attempt to obscure their identity through intermediaries or shell accounts. This traceability is essential for pursuing damages and dismantling organized counterfeit operations. The ETDA is now considering adjustments to the draft notification after receiving comments during the public consultation period, which ended on February 2, 2026. Following finalization
Read More