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

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 INSIGHTS​ 

July 6, 2026
Indonesia’s regulation on reporting online intellectual property (IP) infringement provides comprehensive procedural guidance for IP rights holders and their licensees in reporting online infringement complaints. Issued in December 2025 by the Ministry of Law as Regulation No. 47 of 2025 regarding Handling of Intellectual Property Infringement Reports in Electronic Systems, this regulation covers all types of IP rights. It also specifies documentation when reporting infringement, and lays out the procedures for examination, verification, and enforcement actions. Submission of Complaints Complainants may submit reports through the online system of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or in person at the DGIP office. Complaints may also be filed through an authorized proxy. Under the regulation, complainants are required to provide the following information and documents: Personal details of the complainant; Brief description of the protected work or subject matter (i.e., type of IP and name or address of the infringing website, portal, account, or application, or a link to the location of the infringing content); Complete description of the alleged infringement; Certificate of registration or recordal of the relevant IP; Recordal of IP license agreement, if any; and Other supporting evidence. Verification and Examination Process Upon receiving a complaint, the responsible formality officer may request clarification or additional supporting documents. In the latter case, the complainant must then submit the necessary administrative documents within 14 days of the notification date. Once the documentation is deemed complete and sufficient, the case will be formally registered. Subsequently, the DGIP will establish a verification team to handle online IP violations, which will include the Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, experts with relevant expertise in IP, and representatives from related associations such as AVISI (Indonesian Video Streaming Association). After examining the report, the team will prepare the Minutes
July 6, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Vietnam chapter to Data Protection & Privacy 2027, a global guide published by Lexology Panoramic that provides comparative insights into data protection and privacy regimes across multiple jurisdictions. The Vietnam chapter offers a comprehensive overview of the country’s data protection framework, addressing both regulatory structure and practical compliance considerations for businesses operating in or engaging with Vietnam. Topics covered include: Law and the regulatory authority: Legislative framework; data protection authority; cooperation with other data protection authorities; breaches of data protection law; judicial review of data protection authority orders Scope: Exempt sectors and institutions; interception of communications and surveillance laws; other laws; personal information formats; extraterritoriality; covered uses of personal information Legitimate processing of personal information: Lawful bases for processing; grounds for legitimate processing; types of personal information Data handling responsibilities of owners of personal information: Transparency; exemptions from transparency obligations; data accuracy; data minimization; data retention; purpose limitation; automated decision-making Security: Security obligations; notification of data breaches; internal controls Accountability: Data protection officer requirements; record-keeping; risk assessment; design of personal information processing systems Registration and notification: Registration requirements; other transparency duties Sharing and cross-border transfers of personal information: Sharing with processors and service providers; restrictions on third-party disclosures; cross-border transfers; further transfers; localization requirements Rights of individuals: Right of access; other statutory rights; compensation Enforcement: Enforcement mechanisms; exemptions, derogations, and restrictions; further exemptions and restrictions Specific data processing: Cookies and similar technologies; electronic communications marketing; targeted advertising; sensitive personal information; profiling; cloud services The chapter concludes with an update on key legal and regulatory developments over the past year and emerging trends in Vietnam’s data protection landscape. The full Vietnam chapter is available as a PDF through the button below. Readers can also gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Data
July 2, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) released a new version of the draft Act on Artificial Intelligence on July 2, 2026, for a public hearing period expected to be approximately 30 days. The draft act adopts a risk-based regulatory approach modeled in part on international frameworks—particularly the EU’s AI Act—while incorporating provisions tailored to Thailand’s regulatory landscape and digital economy objectives. If enacted in its current form, the law would introduce extraterritorial obligations, a tiered risk classification system, strict liability for AI-related damages, and new transparency requirements for AI-generated content. Scope and Extraterritorial Application The draft act applies to AI development, deployment, or any other action affecting people in Thailand, even if the action occurs outside the country. Of note: This extraterritorial reach creates compliance obligations for global AI companies whose systems impact Thai residents or consumers, even if the provider has no physical presence in Thailand. Foreign AI providers serving Thai deployers or users must appoint a local coordinator or authorized representative. Depending on the type of AI system, the representative may need full authority to act on behalf of the provider without any limitation of liability. Certain activities are exempt from the draft act’s oversight, including AI used by natural persons solely for personal or household activities, AI for educational research conducted by higher education institutions with ethics committee approval, research and development activities conducted prior to distribution or service provision, and other AI systems prescribed by royal decree. Risk-Based Classification Framework The draft act establishes a tiered risk classification system with three main categories: Prohibited AI. The act outright prohibits AI systems employing cognitive-behavioral manipulation using subliminal techniques, AI systems causing unfair broad-scale discrimination from processing irrelevant data, and other categories of serious risk as determined by announcement of a forthcoming committee that will be responsible
June 25, 2026
On June 18, 2026, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published two notifications in the Government Gazette establishing Thailand’s first formal certification framework for personal data protection standards under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The notifications, which took immediate effect, introduce a voluntary certification framework aimed at promoting accountability, strengthening organizational data protection governance, and aligning Thailand more closely with international frameworks that recognize certification as a key compliance tool. Certification Criteria The first notification sets out the assessment criteria for organizations seeking certification. Applicants must undergo an evaluation against a framework comprising four assessment categories, 10 focus areas, and 128 assessment criteria covering key elements of a privacy management program. These include: Organizational oversight and internal policies and procedures. Human resource development, including staff training and awareness programs. Clearly defined operational processes and procedures covering data subject rights, transparency obligations, records of processing activities, and lawful basis management, as well as contractual safeguards such as data-processing and data-sharing agreements and risk assessments, including Data Protection Impact Assessments. Technical measures encompassing data security controls and breach response capabilities Based on the assessment results, organizations may be awarded either a PDPA Compliance Certificate or a higher-level PDPA Certificate accompanied by a certification mark. Application and Assessment Process The second notification establishes the application and assessment process for obtaining certification. Eligible applicants include government agencies and private-sector entities that demonstrate sufficient privacy governance maturity and meet the prescribed eligibility requirements. Applicants must submit their applications along with supporting documentation for review. Upon receiving an application, the Office of the PDPC will conduct a detailed evaluation, which may include both documentary review and on-site inspections. Incomplete applications may be rejected, though applicants are typically given a limited period to correct deficiencies before a final decision