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 11, 2026

Thailand Set to Overhaul Its E-Transactions Framework

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act.

The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand.

Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors

The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies.

Enhanced E-Signature Definition

The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data.

Shift in Burden of Proof

When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger.

Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts

The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include:

  • Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp)
  • Electronic registered delivery
  • Electronic company seals
  • Electronic stamp duty compliance
  • Electronic identity authentication and verification
  • Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments)

Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting

The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review or intervention was involved in the transaction process.

The draft, however, also introduces safeguards for unexpected automated actions. Where an automated system acts in a manner that could not reasonably have been anticipated by the party using the system, the action may not be legally binding if the counterparty knew or should reasonably have known that such action was unintended or unforeseeable.

In addition, the draft ETA provides protection for input errors made by individuals interacting with another party’s automated system. If the system does not provide a means to correct the error, the individual may withdraw the erroneous electronic communication, provided that notice of the error is given promptly after discovery; and the individual has not received or benefited from the relevant goods or services.

These new requirements would impact the use of AI, especially agentic AI, in business operations.

New Obligations for E-Transaction Service Providers

The draft ETA proposes to replace the current mandatory licensing regime applicable to certain electronic transaction businesses with a voluntary certification framework.

The draft ETA identifies seven categories of electronic transaction services: (1) identity verification, (2) electronic signature services, (3) timestamping, (4) electronic data transmission and storage, (5) website or domain name registration/certification, (6) electronic transferable record systems, and (7) other services prescribed by ministerial regulation. Service providers in these categories must comply with detailed operational duties, including maintaining reliable systems, processes, and personnel; implementing risk management frameworks; publishing electronic channels for complaints; and enforcing cybersecurity measures together with protocols for notifying, remedying, and mitigating damage from incidents.

Providers that clearly disclose the purpose and limitations of their services are shielded from liability where users act outside or beyond those disclosed boundaries.

Shifting Criminal Penalties to Civil Liability

The draft ETA removes the existing criminal penalties imposed on service providers operating without the required license, registration, or notification. These violations currently carry penalties of imprisonment for up to three years and/or fines of up to THB 300,000. This change aligns with the draft ETA’s shift from a mandatory licensing regime to a voluntary certification framework. Under the proposed framework, enforcement would instead focus on civil liability. In particular, service providers that fail to comply with their duties prescribed in the Draft ETA may be held liable for damages suffered by users or other relevant parties.

Implications for Businesses

The draft ETA carries several key implications for businesses operating in Thailand:

  • Digital-first policy. Organizations should evaluate whether internal workflows—especially government filings, notices, and contract execution—can migrate to fully electronic processes.
  • E-signatures and biometrics. Organizations using biometric authentication (fingerprints, facial recognition) for contract execution will have clearer statutory backing but must ensure compliance with Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act.
  • Burden of proof. Businesses should proactively align their systems with ETDA-prescribed standards.
  • New digital methods. Businesses may rely on e-signatures, e-stamping, e-delivery, and digital identity verification with greater legal certainty, reducing operational friction and supporting digital transformation.
  • Automated systems. Businesses should review their internal procedures and legal limitations for automated systems, AI tools, and digital contracting.
  • Licensing regime. The draft ETA shifts from regulatory approval to a standards-based framework. While licensing burdens may decrease, greater emphasis will be placed on ETDA-prescribed standards, operational reliability, and civil liability.
  • Civil liability shift. Despite reduced criminal exposure, service providers must maintain compliance and operational standards, as failures may result in civil liability for damages.

Next Steps

After the public hearing, the draft ETA will be revisited and further proposed to the parliament for consideration and approval before enactment. This process may take up to a year.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
April 9, 2026
As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities. The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data. Structure of the Consultation Process According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases: Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA. Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations. Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder
Read More