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 7, 2022

Thailand Opens Public Hearing Period on Measures for Cross-Border Transfer of Personal Data

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) has opened a public hearing period on its draft notification regarding cross-border transfer of personal data. The public hearing is open through October 24. The notification, once issued, will supplement the principle of cross-border transfer of personal data outside of Thailand set out in the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA).

The notification sets out the following key matters:

Definitions

  • “Transfer of personal data” means any sending or transferring of personal data by a transferor of personal data, either by way of a physical transfer or a remote transfer through a computer system or an internet network to the recipient of the personal data. It does not include sending personal data through an intermediary by transiting between computer systems or internet networks, or any storing or retaining of personal data, either permanently or temporarily, by a cloud computing service provider, whereby the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient (1) are not making the order, (2) are not involved with any data selection or the content of the personal data sent and received through the computer systems or internet networks, or (3) have the purpose of entering into an agreement or any juristic act.
  • “Binding corporate rules” means the agreed terms or policy on personal data protection made between the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient to establish appropriate measures for safeguarding personal data within a group of corporations or companies.
  • “Standard contractual clauses” means the contractual terms made between the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient to establish appropriate measures for safeguarding personal data.
  • “Code of conduct” means a code that sets out the obligations of a personal data transferor and a personal data recipient outside of Thailand.
  • “Certification” means an undertaking in relation to safeguarding personal data, in order to establish appropriate personal data safeguarding measures.

Binding Corporate Rules

For cross-border transfers within a group of corporations or companies, binding corporate rules (BCRs) can be established and submitted to the PDPC for approval. The BCRs must adhere to the following minimum standards:

  • The effectiveness and legally binding nature of the BCRs apply to each company or entity within the group, including the data recipient, data processor, and data transferor, and the members belonging to the group, as well as their employees, staff, or persons related to the transfer or receipt of personal data within the group.
  • The BCRs must comply with Thai laws on personal data protection.
  • The BCRs must contain certification of data subject rights under the PDPA and sub-regulations.
  • The BCRs must contain measures on personal data protection in relation to personnel, processes, and security measures in accordance with the required technology standards for personal data protection.

Appropriate Safeguards

In accordance with section 29, paragraph 3, of the PDPA, a personal data transferor may transfer personal data to a recipient outside of Thailand when procuring appropriate safeguard measures by way of “standard contractual clauses,” “code of conduct,” or “certification.” Such appropriate safeguards must at least ensure the enforceability of the data subject’s rights and effective legal remedial actions, as provided in the annexes of the notification.

The appropriate safeguards must at least have the following:

  • Effectiveness and legal enforceability.
  • Compliance with Thai laws on personal data protection.
  • Certification of data subject rights under the PDPA and sub-regulations.
  • Measures on personal data protection in relation to personnel, process, and security measures in accordance with the required technology standards for personal data protection.

The standard contractual clauses must be filed with the PDPC. The appropriate safeguard measures must be enforceable under Thai law, and they must provide data subject rights under Thai law. Such rights must also be enforceable and provide remedial rights for data subjects as stipulated under Thai law.

The notification also sets out standard contractual clauses for controller-to-controller and controller-to-processor international transfers. The clauses primarily stipulate the obligations of the transferor and the recipient, recognize the enforceability of the PDPA provisions on personal data protection, and ensure the ability of data subjects to exercise their rights (in the form of third-party rights).

For more information from Tilleke & Gibbins’ data privacy team regarding the draft notification, or any aspect of compliance with PDPA requirements, please contact Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected], Gvavalin Mahakunkitchareon at [email protected], or Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 26, 2025
Vietnam’s new Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) was passed by the National Assembly on June 26, 2025, and will enter into force on January 1, 2026. The PDPL introduces several new concepts, exemptions, and obligations in comparison with the current Decree No. 13/2023/ND-CP on personal data protection (PDPD), while other contents remain essentially the same. The relationship between the PDPD and the PDPL has not been clearly addressed; however, it is expected that the government will issue a new decree providing necessary guidance on certain requirements under the PDPL, and the PDPD will remain in effect until it is replaced by this new decree. Some key points of the new PDPL include the following: Personal data will be further defined by lists of basic personal data and sensitive personal data to be issued by the government. The consent-centric approach of the PDPD remains in place, along with additional exemptions for certain data processing activities. The requirements for the data processing impact assessment (DPIA) and transfer impact assessment (TIA) remain unchanged. However, there are new exemptions for the TIA, including for the processing and storing in the cloud of employee data, and when the data subject is the person sending its own data outside of Vietnam. Consent obtained under the PDPD remains valid under the PDPL. DPIAs and TIAs submitted under the PDPD are valid under the PDPL but may need to be updated to be in line with the requirements of the PDPL. Administrative fines depend on the type of violation. The fine for sale and purchase of personal data will be 10 times the revenue from the sale or VND 3 billion (about USD 115,000), whichever is higher. The fine for cross-border transfer violations is 5% of the violator’s revenue of the preceding year or VND 3 billion,
Read More
June 25, 2025
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is no longer a distant innovation confined to science fiction and research labs; it has become an integral part of daily business operations worldwide. Employees across industries are adopting GenAI tools at a remarkable pace—including in Southeast Asia, where a tech-savvy workforce and widespread internet and mobile access have driven early adoption. The reality facing organizations today is clear: employees are integrating GenAI into their daily work, often without official approval or clear policies. This phenomenon, often called “Bring Your Own AI,” comes out of a disconnect between organizational governance and employee behavior and reveals the urgent need for proactive AI policies and oversight. For business leaders and legal teams, GenAI is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, these tools can deliver real business value and boost efficiency. On the other, the unsanctioned and unmonitored use of GenAI introduces substantial legal risks, such as data privacy violations, confidentiality breaches, and intellectual property issues. The widespread adoption of GenAI tools by employees, regardless of official organizational stance or guidelines, demonstrates that prohibition is neither practical nor effective. A more strategic approach involves establishing comprehensive governance policies that encourage responsible AI use while managing the risks. Organizations that take the lead in developing GenAI governance policies are better positioned to benefit from its transformative potential. The question isn’t whether GenAI will change how we work, but how quickly organizations can put the right safeguards in place to manage this change successfully. Risks of GenAI Use The use of GenAI in business operations, whether sanctioned or not, exposes organizations to a unique set of risks. The following are particularly relevant: Data security and confidentiality: General GenAI tools in the market may transmit data to external servers, retain conversation histories, and use inputs for model training.
Read More
June 19, 2025
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has released draft guidelines establishing principles for managing artificial intelligence (AI) risks in the financial sector. The draft guidelines provide a structured framework for the responsible adoption of AI technologies. Financial service providers will be able to use the guidelines as a reference to appropriately manage their risks in a manner that aligns with internationally recognized best practices. The BOT is accepting public comments on the draft guidelines until June 30, 2025. Scope and Application The draft guidelines apply to all financial service providers, including financial institutions and special financial institutions under the Financial Institution Business Act, as well as payment providers under the Payment Systems Act. These guidelines supplement existing BOT risk management guidelines covering IT risk management, third-party risk management, data governance, and market conduct. The guidelines define AI systems as systems that mimic human intelligence, including machine learning, deep learning, generative AI (such as large language models), and agentic AI. This definition specifically excludes rule-based automation systems like robotic process automation and condition matching. Key Risk Management Principles The guidelines lay out two main principles in managing AI risk. Governance: Financial service providers should define and establish clear roles and responsibilities for their personnel and AI system supervision structures to uphold FEAT (fairness, ethics, accountability, and transparency) principles as follows: Stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Financial service providers should define roles and responsibilities for boards and executives on AI risk oversight. Responsibilities include establishing an AI system usage policy, designating personnel responsible for AI risk management, and building awareness of AI-related risk within the organization. AI system usage policy. The AI system usage policy should be aligned with organizational objectives, regulatory requirements, and FEAT principles. These policies should be reviewed regularly to respond to technological advancements and evolving risk profiles. Risk management
Read More
June 19, 2025
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has announced plans for increased enforcement of the Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses That Are Subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022). The ETDA outlined a comprehensive enforcement framework and review process during an online meeting with digital platform service operators on June 11, 2025. The ETDA’s enhanced enforcement approach includes systematic reviews of notification submissions, formal correction orders, and potential criminal penalties for noncompliance. Digital platform operators should immediately assess their current notification status and prepare for increased regulatory scrutiny. Review and Amendment of Previously Submitted Notification Data The ETDA will begin reviewing operation notification forms and annual reports submitted by digital platform service operators to assess each platform’s risk level and develop tailored regulatory obligations. In this comprehensive review process, the ETDA will: Examine the accuracy and completeness of submitted notification data; Request additional information as needed by phone or email; and Issue formal orders as needed requiring operators to correct or complete missing information. Operators who fail to comply with ETDA orders may face suspension of operations, revocation of their notification receipt, and public disclosure of their noncompliant status on the ETDA’s website. The ETDA will conduct follow-up workshops in July 2025 for operators whose data remains unclear or incomplete. Enforcement Framework and Penalties The ETDA outlined a three-tiered enforcement framework with escalating consequences for different types of violations, as follows: Failure to notify before commencing operations: Operators who begin services without proper notification may face criminal penalties under the Electronic Transactions Act, including up to one year of imprisonment, fines of up to THB 100,000 (approx. USD 3,070), or both. Additional consequences include suspension of operations and potential liability for company directors. Failure to correct or comply with official orders: Noncompliance with ETDA correction
Read More