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

November 8, 2024

Thailand Seeks Public Comments on Draft Amendments to ROPA Exemptions

Subscribe to Updates

On October 31, 2024, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) opened a public consultation period on its draft notifications—one directed at data controllers and another at data processors—regarding exemptions from the requirement to create and maintain records of processing activities (ROPAs) under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA).

The draft notification for data controllers aims to amend and revoke certain aspects of the first ROPA exemption notification issued in June 2022 and outlines the criteria for data controllers to be exempted from the obligation to prepare and maintain such records. Although it is officially titled “Notification of the Personal Data Protection Committee on Exemption from Record-Keeping Requirements for Small Business Data Controllers,” this draft notification applies to all types of exempted data controllers (see list below), and not only small businesses.

The draft notification for data processors is new and does not replace any prior notification.

The criteria under both draft notifications exempt certain data controllers and data processors from the obligation to maintain ROPAs, but exempted data controllers are not free from the obligation to retain information on the rejection of data subjects’ requests to exercise certain rights under the PDPA. While these criteria remain consistent with the June 2022 ROPA exemption notification, there are a few key takeaways from the notifications, as detailed below.

Types of Exempted Parties

The draft notification on data controllers adds condominium and housing estate juristic persons, as well as individuals, to the list of parties eligible for an exemption, while removing internet cafes from the list. The new draft notification for data processors mirrors the corresponding list in the draft notification for data controllers.

The complete list of parties eligible for ROPA exemptions under the draft notifications is as follows:

  • SMEs according to the law on SME promotion, defined as follows:

  • Community or social enterprises, as referred to under the law on community enterprise promotion.
  • Social enterprises, as referred to under the law on social enterprise promotion.
  • Cooperatives, cooperative unions, or agriculturist groups under the law on cooperatives.
  • Foundations, associations, religious bodies, or nonprofit organizations.
  • Household businesses or other businesses of the same nature.
  • Condominium or housing estate juristic persons as defined by the laws on condominiums or housing estates, respectively.
  • Individual data controllers.

Carve-Outs from the ROPA Exemption

Parties exempted from the ROPA requirement under the draft notifications for data controllers and data processors must not be obligated to appoint a data protection officer (DPO) under the PDPA. In addition, exempted parties must still prepare and maintain a ROPA when the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data:

  • Poses a risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects.
  • Is not occasional collection, use, or disclosure of personal data.
  • Involves special categories of personal data as specified in section 26 of the PDPA—for example, health data, biometric data, religious information, and so on.

Under the June 2022 ROPA exemption notification, data controllers who are service providers required to retain computer traffic data under the law related to computer crime are not eligible for the exemption. The draft notification for data controllers, however, does not currently include this stipulation.

The consultation period for both draft notifications is open until November 14, 2024, and the drafts may be subject to additional revisions before being finalized and made legally binding.

For more details on this draft notification, or on any aspect of compliance with the PDPA, please contact Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected], Napassorn Lertussavavivat at [email protected], or Wilin Somya at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 2, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) enforcement has entered a new phase, and the insurance industry is squarely in the regulatory spotlight. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) considers insurers “large-scale” processors of sensitive data—including health records, financial information, and biometric data—making the sector a focal point for enforcement action. In August 2025 alone, the PDPC issued administrative fines totaling THB 21.5 million, and fines for individual violations have ranged from THB 50,000 to THB 2 million. The PDPC has also deployed its “Eagle Eye Crawler,” an AI-driven surveillance tool that monitors websites around the clock for data leaks and noncompliant privacy notices. This article highlights the key regulatory developments directly affecting insurers and outlines practical steps toward compliance. What Has Changed: OIC and PDPC Alignment The Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) has synchronized its sector-specific rules with the PDPA through the Notification on Customer Personal Data Protection (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025). The combined effect of the PDPC’s general enforcement push and the OIC’s sectoral guidance creates four critical compliance areas for insurers. Consent unbundling. Consent for marketing must be strictly separated from the core insurance contract; bundling marketing consent into the policy application is no longer permissible. Agent and intermediary oversight. Insurance intermediaries are generally classified as data processors, meaning that insurers—as data controllers—must provide specific written instructions and security protocols to all agents and brokers. A 2026 enforcement trend shows controllers being held liable for the “weak security” of their vendors and downstream processors. Enhanced privacy notices. Insurers must provide a summary privacy notice alongside the full policy, plainly stating categories of data, purposes, lawful bases, disclosure recipients, cross-border transfers, retention periods, data subject rights, and easy marketing opt-out channels. DPO registration and ROPA. All organizations involved in “regular or systematic monitoring of data subjects on
Read More
March 30, 2026
On March 24, 2026, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) published its long-anticipated Guidelines on Multi-Sided Platforms and E-Commerce Businesses in the Government Gazette, following the conclusion of a public hearing conducted last year. The guidelines entered into force on March 25, 2026, and significantly expand the application of Thai competition law to digital platform ecosystems. These rules introduce targeted restrictions on platform conduct, such as price-ranking algorithms and tying and bunding, that leverages network effects, and will have far-reaching implications across Thailand’s digital economy—affecting not only platform operators but also platform participants, including sellers, logistics providers, advertisers, and payment service providers operating on or alongside such platforms. The guidelines clarify how existing prohibitions under the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA)—including abuse of market dominance, cartel conduct, and unfair trade practices—apply in the context of platform-based business models. While many provisions reflect earlier draft guidelines, the final version delivers more precise definitions and clearer enforcement parameters, increasing regulatory certainty while also raising compliance expectations. Applicability The guidelines introduce core definitions that determine their coverage: Multi-sided platform: A platform that acts as an intermediary connecting two or more groups of users, enabling them to have direct interaction in order to exchange or rely on services from one another. Examples include digital platforms for trading goods or services (e-commerce), as defined below. Digital platform for trading goods or services (e-commerce): A platform that acts as an intermediary connecting the distribution, purchase, sale, or exchange of goods or services. This includes operations carried out to facilitate transactions or interactions between business operators through an electronic transaction system, regardless of whether a service fee is charged. Operator of a digital platform business for trading goods or services: A provider of digital platform services for trading goods or services, as described
Read More
March 27, 2026
Thailand’s National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) has publicly indicated that it is preparing a new regulatory framework for data center operators that may introduce foreign-ownership restrictions. In particular, the NBTC is considering reclassifying data center operations from a type 1 telecommunications business license to a type 3 license. If implemented, this change would subject data center operators to a significantly more stringent regulatory regime, especially in relation to foreign ownership and control. The NBTC has indicated that it intends to propose a draft framework to the NBTC board. This would be followed by a public hearing process, with a view to implementing the new rules within 2026. Under the Telecommunications Business Act B.E. 2544 (2001), as amended, telecommunications businesses operating under type 3 licenses are subject to foreign ownership restrictions, including a requirement that less than 50% of the total issued shares be held by foreign shareholders. In addition, type 3 licensees are subject to foreign dominance restrictions, which prohibit arrangements that allow foreigners to dominate the business. These foreign dominance restrictions are broad in scope and may capture various forms of direct and indirect control or influence. This includes circumstances in which a foreign national is able to influence or control the formulation of policy, management, or business operations, or the appointment of directors or senior executives. At this stage, the exact scope of the proposed rules remains unclear. Businesses with existing or planned data center operations in Thailand should therefore monitor upcoming NBTC developments in this regard and prepare for the expected public hearing process.
Read More
March 27, 2026
Vietnam’s emerging governance framework for artificial intelligence (AI) is developing through a multi-layered structure comprising three components: Policy instruments setting national priorities for AI development; Regulatory framework governing development, provision, deployment and use of AI; and Technical standards and voluntary guidelines. Policy level. At policy level, the foundation for a strategic framework for AI development and governance was laid in 2021 by the National Strategy for Research, Development and Application of AI until 2030, aimed at strengthening the national AI ecosystem and positioning Vietnam as a regional AI innovation hub. Subsequently, resolution No.57-NQ/TW (2024) identified AI as a key driver of science, technology, innovation and national digital transformation. AI was also designated as a strategic technology under decision No.1131/QD-TTg (2025) listing priority technologies across sectors. Regulatory framework. At the legislative level, the new Law on Artificial Intelligence took effect on 1 March 2026, establishing the core regulatory framework governing development, provision, deployment and use of AI systems. Controlled testing for emerging AI technologies is implemented under the Law on Science, Technology and Innovation. The AI Law is expected to be further operationalised through implementing instruments, most notably a draft decree guiding the AI Law, and draft decision of the prime minister identifying high-risk AI systems (both published in February 2026). A decision establishing priority datasets for AI development is also anticipated. Compliance obligations may also arise under sectoral regulatory regimes, including data protection, cybersecurity, banking, consumer protection, e-commerce and intellectual property, particularly where AI systems are used in automated decision-making or data-driven services. Technical standards and non-binding guidelines. Vietnam’s AI governance framework is also supported by technical standards and voluntary guidelines. A key instrument is decision No.1290/QD-BKHCN (2024), providing guidelines for responsible research and development of AI systems, and represents Vietnam’s first national AI ethics code. The Ministry of Science and Technology
Read More