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

June 13, 2022

Thailand Removes Cannabis from the Narcotics List – What’s Next for the Industry?

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s cannabis cultivation licensing scheme for the country’s transition toward legalization of the plant has now come to an end. The Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) announced in the Government Gazette that from June 9, 2022, “only cannabis extract with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) of more than 0.2% by weight will be considered a narcotic.” This means that now anyone can grow, sell, or purchase cannabis seeds, plants, and inflorescence freely in Thailand, and licenses for the cultivation, possession, and distribution of cannabis are no longer required. Neither the number of cannabis plants nor the place of cultivation is restricted. It is thus the beginning of a new chapter for cannabis cultivation in Thailand, with many opining that now is a good time to enter this exciting and growing industry.

The journey to this point began in 2019, when Thailand amended its laws on cannabis to allow for treatment for medical purposes, with one of the prerequisite conditions being that the cannabis must be grown in Thailand. The law was further amended to promote commercialization of the cannabis industry, allowing for cannabis to be added to food and beverages, cosmetics, and herbal products. In addition, three traditional cannabis-based formulas were listed in the universal healthcare coverage scheme, which means that almost all Thais have access to traditional cannabis recipes without cost. The successful launch of medical cannabis and its applications, and its viability as an economic industry, have become a national agenda and priority policy of the MOPH.

In order to achieve the above outcomes, several legal frameworks and guidelines throughout the product’s lifecycle have been developed. For example, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has so far granted licenses to cultivate cannabis (also known as a license to manufacture a narcotic) on more than 1,977 acres (around 800 hectares). Health professionals and Thai traditional doctors who attended the government’s training course and obtained a license to prescribe medicinal cannabis products can now prescribe cannabis regimens for their patients. The FDA announced that they have registered over a thousand cannabis-related products, including herbal products, food, and cosmetics.

Throughout the product development lifecycle, from cultivation to launch of a finished product, the Thai FDA has regulated and monitored the cannabis industry through a license and registration scheme, which has seemed to be an effective controlling pathway. It is this licensing scheme that was ended by the recent MOPH announcement that removed the cannabis plant from the narcotics list.
To help readers take stock of the present situation, the Q&A below addresses some of the frequently asked Thailand-related questions in the cannabis industry.

Q: Does this mean we can import cannabis extract with THC <0.2% by weight into Thailand, as it is not a narcotic?
A: No. The exemption from being classified as a narcotic applies only to extract from cannabis cultivated in Thailand. Importing cannabis extract, even in the THC <0.2% range, violates the Narcotics Code of Thailand.

Q: Can we sell and buy inflorescence if the THC in the dried portion of the inflorescence is more than 0.2% by dried weight?
A: Yes. The inflorescences, seeds, plants, and roots of cannabis are no longer classified as narcotics. They can be sold and purchased in Thailand without prior regulatory approval.

Q: Can a restaurant or café make soups or beverages infused with cannabis inflorescences?
A: This is a complicated question. Making a soup involves a water-based method of cooking and applying heat, which can extract some THC from the inflorescence. It is possible that the soup or beverage may contain THC in a quantity above 0.2% by weight. Therefore, the chef and restaurant may be subject to a criminal penalty according to the Narcotics Code. Furthermore, the Food Act and its bylaws do not allow the use of cannabis inflorescence in food. Bark, fiber, stems, branches, roots, and leaves of cannabis are allowed for use in food, but the use of inflorescences in a soup or beverage would violate the food laws of Thailand.

Thailand’s transformation and revision of its cannabis regulations have led to countless questions and doubts from the industry. However, some entrepreneurs and farmers have found that the changes have lessened bureaucratic hurdles and opened more opportunities. A careful review of the latest developments in Thailand’s cannabis laws and regulations will help investors ensure that their products and activities are within the latest legal bounds of this nascent and fast-evolving industry.

For further information on Thailand’s regulatory environment for cannabis, please contact Dr. Atthachai Homhuan at [email protected] or +66 2056 5610.

Related Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 9, 2026
On August 5, 2026, the Consumer Case Division of Thailand’s Civil Court rendered a judgment in a case involving a beauty clinic that advertised acne scar treatments using claims that the clinic was operated by a specialist physician and that the treatment, allegedly involving stem cell technology, could permanently remove acne scars. The plaintiff brought a claim against both the physician-owner and the clinic company, alleging that the advertisements were false and induced her to purchase the treatment. The court found that the clinic was liable for the false representations and that the physician-owner, as both the authorized director of the company and the medical practitioner who provided treatment, was jointly responsible. Although the plaintiff could not fully prove all damages claimed, the court awarded compensation of THB 20,000, together with interest. While the judgment arose from a consumer protection dispute, it serves as a valuable reminder that medical facility advertisements in Thailand are regulated and may expose clinics and healthcare providers not only to regulatory enforcement but also to civil liability from patients who rely on misleading promotional claims. Regulatory Framework Governing Medical Facility Advertisements Medical facility advertising in Thailand is governed by the Medical Facility Act B.E. 2541 (1998), as amended by the Medical Facility Act (No. 4) B.E. 2559 (2016). The principal secondary legislation is the Department of Health Service Support (DoHSS) Notification Re: Rules, Procedures, Conditions, and Fees for an Advertisement or Publication Concerning a Medical Facility, which came into force on November 25, 2019. Under this notification, “advertising” includes any act, by any means, that causes members of the public to see, hear, or otherwise become aware of a message, sound, or image for the commercial benefit of a medical facility. This broad definition covers not only traditional media but also clinic websites, social
Read More
September 9, 2026
On June 30, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 on Food Packaging, which expands the list of approved food-contact substances and recognizes a broader range of permissible functions for those substances. The new regulation, which revokes BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, reflects developments in packaging technology and materials science. Although the new regulation provides more advantages to business actors by adding more food contact substances to the approved list for use in food packaging, there are more stringent rules and restrictions for testing. One of the most significant changes is a comprehensive migration-testing framework that sets out requirements for packaging materials, testing conditions, food simulants, and specific migration limits. Overall and Specific Migration Under BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, migration requirements were primarily set out within the lists of approved food-contact substances and packaging materials. BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 instead expressly requires packaging materials that come into direct contact with food to meet both overall and specific migration limits. These are defined as follows: Overall migration: The total quantity of all substances that migrate from the packaging, regardless of whether the substances are hazardous or nonhazardous to health. Specific migration: The quantity of a particular identified substance known to be hazardous to health that migrates from the packaging. Stricter Limits on Heavy Metals The overall migration limit for plastic packaging remains unchanged under both regulations at 60 mg/kg or 10 mg/dm². However, the new regulation introduces significant changes to the regulation of heavy metals. Under the 2019 regulation, four heavy metals—lead, cadmium, chromium VI, and mercury—were subject to a single combined limit of 1 mg/kg. The 2026 regulation, however, requires each heavy metal to meet its own individual specific migration limit, adds arsenic as
Read More
September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
Read More
September 4, 2026
Blind boxes and collectibles have become increasingly popular, driven by the excitement of not knowing which character or design will be revealed until the package is opened. While most visible in the art toy market, the same concept is also used in the food industry. Confectionery, snacks, and other food products are sometimes sold with toys, character figures, cards, or other collectibles. A package might, for example, contain one of ten possible characters, with consumers knowing that an item is included but not which one they will receive. Some collections may also feature rare or “secret” items. For food businesses, however, adding a randomized toy or collectible involves more than a marketing decision. The food, the nonfood item, and the randomized mechanism may each raise different regulatory considerations in Thailand. Thai FDA Requirements for Nonfood Objects Packaged with Food The main food regulatory consideration is Ministry of Public Health Notification No. 310 B.E. 2551 (2008), which regulates food packaged together with things or objects that are not food. Under Notification No. 310, certain nonfood objects may be packaged together with food where they fall within specified exceptions, including objects that serve the following purposes: Maintaining the quality or standard of the food, such as a desiccant or oxygen absorber; Serving as a seasoning or as part of food preparation, such as chili powder sachets or seasoning sachets contained in instant noodle packages; or Functioning as an eating or food-preparation utensil, such as a spoon or fork included with instant noodles. Other nonfood objects that do not fall within these categories generally should not be placed inside the food container together with the food. Where a toy, collectible, or other nonfood object is intended to be sold together with a food product, businesses should therefore carefully consider the nature of
Read More