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

December 11, 2024

Thailand Releases Draft of Amended Electronic Transactions Act

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand has released a draft amended Electronic Transactions Act (ETA), which aims to overhaul the current version of the law from 2001 to correct its enforcement limitations and update the ETA to be consistent with current electronic transactions practice. The draft ETA is open for public comment until December 20, 2024.

The draft ETA introduces a new supervisory scheme that (1) recognizes electronic transactions executed by both current and future technologies without having to enact regulations recognizing the technology, (2) replaces the licensing, registration, and notification scheme for electronic transaction service providers with a trust-mark scheme, and (3) introduces a new mechanism to regulate electronic transaction service providers.

The major amendments under the draft ETA address:

  • Relationship with other relevant laws. The draft ETA is designated as the primary law governing electronic transactions, whether between private parties or between private parties and the state. However, if specific laws—including those on electronic administrative procedures—prescribe methods for conducting particular electronic transactions, those laws will prevail.
  • Definitions. The draft ETA revises some existing terms, such as “transaction,” which is now more clearly defined as “any act relating to civil or commercial activities, including administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and any other actions by government agencies or officials.” It also introduces new definitions, such as “biometric data,” “automated system,” and “electronic seal.”
  • Electronic transaction reliability. The draft ETA now clearly provides that electronic transactions executed using a method or an electronic method stipulated by the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) as reliable are themselves presumed to be “reliable.” In case of a challenge over the implementation of a certified method or certified service, the challenging party bears the burden of proof and related expenses.
  • Electronic transferable instruments. The draft ETA adopts the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (ETRs) in recognizing ETRs (e.g., electronic bills of lading). The recognized electronic transferable instruments (the term generally used in Thai law) will need to meet requirements such as inclusion of required information for the transferable instrument, utilization of a reliable method for electronic transferable instrument execution, and adherence to electronic transferable instrument-related rights controls (e.g., endorsement, transfer, and amendment of the electronic transferable instruments).
  • Supervision of service providers. The draft ETA eliminates the licensing, registration, and notification scheme for various services (e.g., e-signature, identification proofing and authentication, and registration and certification of websites and domain names). Instead, service providers will be deemed qualified if they comply with the prescribed criteria. Service providers may ask the ETDA to additionally certify their services as reliable, but this is not required. The ETDA can also unilaterally certify reliable electronic transaction service providers. Once the ETDA certifies a service provider, any electronic transaction conducted through that provider (in the certified areas) is deemed reliable, and the certified service providers benefit from liability exemptions under the law. Providers who have already obtained licenses or registered their services under the existing ETA are also recognized as reliable service providers under the draft ETA. The ETDA may periodically announce the names of service providers with reliability issues, resulting in those service providers and their users losing the benefits previously conferred by certification.
  • Supervision of digital platforms. Digital platform services are not supervised under the draft ETA. However, even though the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Services was issued under a provision of the ETA that is not included in the draft ETA, the royal decree will remain in effect and continue to regulate digital platform services until the expected new law on digital platform services (currently under development) is enacted.

For more details on electronic transaction services in Thailand, or any aspect of the country’s technology-related laws and regulations, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins’ Thailand digital platform specialists Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Pornpan Wichawut at [email protected], Rada Lamsam at [email protected], or Rujaporn Paritsantik at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 23, 2026
Vietnam has progressively positioned blockchain as a strategic technology within its broader digital transformation agenda over the past decade. From early policy orientations to more recent legislative developments, the regulatory approach has gradually shifted from high-level recognition to more concrete legal integration. Against this backdrop, a new draft decree regulating activities relating to product and goods identification, authentication, and traceability (the “Draft Decree”) marks a notable turning point. Rather than merely referencing blockchain as a policy priority, the Draft Decree incorporates blockchain directly into a nationwide regulatory system, positioning it as part of the underlying infrastructure for data governance and public administration in relation to the management, verification, and traceability of product-related data. Evolution of Vietnam’s Blockchain Legal Framework: The Draft Decree in Context Vietnam’s blockchain legal framework has developed in several distinct phases. The first phase, beginning around 2019, was characterized by high-level policy recognition in several resolutions of the Party Central Committee. Particularly, blockchain was identified as part of the broader category of digital technologies critical to industrial modernization and participation in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. These resolutions did not regulate blockchain directly, but established its strategic importance at the national level. The second phase (2023 to 2025) saw the introduction of national strategies and technology policies that more explicitly recognized blockchain as a priority technology. Those policies collectively signaled a clear policy commitment to developing blockchain infrastructure and applications. However, these instruments remained largely at a policy-level and did not establish binding regulatory frameworks. The third phase (from 2025) involves the gradual integration of blockchain into sectoral legislation. Laws such as the Law on Digital Technology Industry (2025), the Law on Personal Data Protection (2025), and the Law on Science, Technology, and Innovation (2025) have introduced concepts such as digital assets, crypto assets, and even specific
Read More
April 21, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) has launched a public consultation period on a draft notification setting out criteria for data subject access requests (DSARs). The draft notification addresses practical uncertainties in handling DSARs by introducing standardized procedural requirements for data controllers. The consultation period runs from April 16 to May 15, 2026. The notification will enter into force 30 days from the date of its publication in the Government Gazette. Key Features of the Draft Notification The draft notification covers the following key areas: Scope of information subject to access. Data controllers must enable data subjects to access at least the following upon request: (1) personal data collected directly from them; (2) personal data obtained from other sources; and (3) the source of personal data obtained from other sources without consent. Information required under section 23 of the PDPA and information that must be recorded pursuant to section 39 of the PDPA—such as the categories of personal data collected and purposes of processing—must also be made available. Submission channels and formal requirements. Data controllers must provide at least in-person and postal channels for DSARs, while electronic or other channels are optional. Requests may be made either directly by the data subject or through an authorized representative, and must be signed and include sufficient identifying information, a preferred response method, and DSAR details. Identity verification documents (and proof of authority if the request is through a representative) are required, and additional documentation may be requested for verification or communication purposes. Data controllers may use different verification methods for DSARs submitted via electronic or other channels, provided this does not create undue obstacles to the exercise of data subject rights. Verification and response timelines. Data controllers must complete preliminary verification within seven business days of receiving a request. If a
Read More
April 10, 2026
Thailand has introduced new regulatory guidance requiring digital platform operators to adopt structured, transparent, and fair fee practices. On March 16, 2026, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) published Announcement No. DPS 2/2569, titled “Guidelines for Transparency and Fairness in Digital Platform Service Fee Determination,” issued under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Business Operations B.E. 2565 (2022). The guidelines establish a framework governing how digital platform operators should set, disclose, and adjust fees charged to users and related service providers such as logistics and payment providers. Although framed as best-practice guidance rather than legally binding rules with explicit penalties, the guidelines carry regulatory weight under the royal decree and represent a significant step toward structured governance of digital platform fee practices in Thailand. The guidelines establish various transparency principles and divide fees into two distinct categories—compulsory and additional—with specific governance principles for each. Transparency Principles The guidelines recommend that digital platform operators adopt several transparency measures to ensure that users can fully understand the costs of using a platform. Fee catalog. All fees should be consolidated into a single, accessible location, which should include the fee name, definition, scope of covered services, calculation methodology, rate, billing period, and calculation examples. Minimum service disclosure. Operators should disclose the minimum service that users can expect, such as baseline visibility, product listing capabilities, access to transaction data, and back-end dashboard access. Price structure disclosure. Operators should disclose the categories of costs underlying their fees, such as system maintenance, cybersecurity, and operational costs. While exact cost figures need not be made public, operators should be able to provide numerical data to regulators upon request. Clear fee formulas. Fee calculations should be simple and easy to understand—for example, percentage of net sales, cost per order, or cost per product listing. Operators should
Read More
April 10, 2026
As digital commerce continues to reshape consumer behavior in Thailand, the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) has been taking steps to review and update key regulations for online platforms. The OCPB has had a particular focus on addressing the risks posed by e-marketplace businesses—from misleading product information to fraudulent online transactions. Some of the regulator’s current legislative efforts related to Thailand’s labeling regulations as well as potential changes to the country’s law on direct sales and marketing. Proposed Changes to Consumer Protection Labeling Regulations On February 24, 2026, the OCPB convened a public hearing to review the Notification of the Committee on Labels re: Specification of Goods as Controlled Label Goods B.E. 2565 (2022) and its annex issued under the Consumer Protection Act. The closed-door session, which started the OPCD’s process of seeking feedback on the proposed changes, brought together representatives from government agencies, business operators, and consumer groups. The OCPB explained that its review of the labeling regulations aims to address regulatory gaps arising from evolving commercial practices, particularly the expansion of e-commerce and cross-border transactions. Authorities highlighted recurring issues involving product information that is unclear, incomplete, or potentially misleading in digital sales channels. The proposed revisions are intended to improve consumers’ access to accurate and complete product information, ensure that label disclosures remain relevant amid the growth of e-commerce, and strengthen protections against deceptive or misleading digital advertising. The review is being undertaken pursuant to the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979). As part of the initiative, the OCPB signaled a potential update to the categories of “controlled label products” as well as enhanced disclosure obligations for business operators, with the broader aim of promoting greater transparency, reinforcing operator accountability, and aligning Thailand’s labeling framework with current market conditions. The OCPB secretary general emphasized that
Read More