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

July 8, 2026

Thailand Tightens Disclosure Rules for Listed Companies

Subscribe to Updates

The Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) has issued new oversight and disclosure rules, effective July 1, 2026, overhauling the previous requirements. The reforms apply to listed companies, REITs, and property and infrastructure funds, and aim to enhance transparency, align with international standards, and ensure timely investor information.

The key changes and practical implications are highlighted below.

Major Shareholder Reporting

When a shareholding change reaching or crossing 5% or any subsequent multiple of 5% is reported under section 246 of the Securities and Exchange Act or a tender offer is completed (except for voluntary delisting), listed companies must disclose an updated shareholder list for the month in which the triggering event occurred. The list must be compiled within five business days after month-end and disclosed within 14 days thereafter. Noncompliance will trigger a “notice pending” (NP) sign.

This replaces the previous requirement to disclose shareholder lists only at annual general meetings or on record dates. Companies should coordinate with their share registrars to meet the new event-driven timelines.

New Financial and Internal Control Disclosures

The new rules require disclosure of material impairment, expected credit losses, and unreturned business deposits when these reach specified thresholds. Companies must also disclose events or indicators that may materially affect their internal control systems.

Boards and audit committees should expect to escalate accounting and internal-control issues earlier, as these matters may now trigger standalone SET disclosure obligations—not just financial statement treatment.

Backdoor Listing

With the Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulation on material transactions (MTs) taking effect on July 1, 2026, and now serving as the primary, standalone framework governing acquisitions and disposals, the SET needed to issue a standalone rule on backdoor listing matters. These matters had been covered by a previous regulation on MTs issued by the SET.

The key differences between the SET’s new rule and the previous SET MT regulation on this issue are highlighted below:

  • Broader asset scope: The new rule applies to any asset or business brought into a listed company, regardless of the seller’s identity, and is no longer limited to assets of unlisted companies.
  • Director and management change trigger: If the asset acquisition also results in a change of more than half of the directors and executives of the listed company (a change from the previous trigger, which applied only to voting rights or power to control the appointment of directors), the SET may exercise its discretion to determine changes in the 12-month period before or after the acquisition.
  • Substance built in: The substance-over-form concept is now embedded more directly into the rule, allowing the SET to review transactions that appear structured to avoid the backdoor listing requirements, including transactions that fall below the size of the 100% threshold but are still significant or may result in a material change of the controlling person.

Stricter Mandatory Delisting Criteria

The SET has also tightened the grounds for mandatory delisting to promote transparency and investor protection, most notably in relation to cash company oversight and free-float requirements.

Status-based cash company test

The cash company (analogous to a “cash shell” in other markets) review has shifted from a transaction-based trigger to a status-based assessment of whether a company still has active operations or holds predominantly passive assets regardless of any specific disposal.

Free-float rules

Previously, large-cap companies (paid-up capital ≥ THB 10 billion) could request a one-year grace period from IPO to meet the free-float requirement (15% of paid-up capital held by at least 150 shareholders). This waiver has now been abolished.

The SET has also tightened the timing for remedial action when a free float falls short of the thresholds. Previously, the remediation period generally started when the company reported that its free float was insufficient. Under the new rules, if a company later corrects its free float report to show that the free float was in fact insufficient, the period will be counted from when the issue should have been identified, not from the correction date. This may shorten the time available before a “noncompliance” (NC) sign applies.

Companies with a free float NC sign are required to submit a remedy plan within a specified period. Failure to cure may ultimately lead to delisting.

Related Professionals

Practices

Capital Markets

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 19, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a new regulation on material transactions (MTs) to govern asset acquisitions and disposals by listed companies and their subsidiaries. The new notification on MT criteria (No. TorJor. 45/2568) from the Capital Market Supervisory Board replaces the long-standing notification (No. TorJor. 20/2551) that has governed such matters. The SEC has also introduced parallel amendments to the country’s related-party transaction rules. The new regulation will take effect on July 1, 2026. Any MT matters approved by a company’s board of directors for shareholders’ approval before that date remain subject to Notification No. TorJor. 20/2551. Following that date, the new MT rules will introduce several significant changes that market participants should carefully consider. Expanded Scope of Material Transactions One of the key changes under the new regulation is the expansion of the definition of MTs, which now expressly covers financial assistance and certain lease and business lease arrangements that are not in the ordinary course of business of the listed company or its subsidiaries. For financial assistance, this includes lending, granting credit, providing guarantees, or entering into any arrangement that increases the company’s financial obligations, particularly where the recipient is facing liquidity issues or unable to repay debts. Other forms of financial support also fall within scope. However, whether the provision of collateral for others qualifies as an MT remains somewhat unclear, since no disposal of assets occurs for the provider of collateral. This issue remains to be carefully considered. For lease-related transactions, the MT rules now specifically include the lease or hire-purchase of all or part of a business or assets operated by or belonging to a listed company or its subsidiaries. New Exemptions The new regulation introduces clearer exemptions for transactions between a listed company and its subsidiaries or among subsidiaries, which
Read More
January 16, 2026
As the Thai stock market faces a downturn, Thai investors have shown increased interest in depositary receipts (DRs), which offer the same tax benefits as Thai stocks while providing access to foreign securities. However, recent speculation in the media has raised concerns among regulators and the market, raising questions about whether DR issuers actually hold the underlying foreign securities purported to be backing the DRs. This has brought the structural integrity of DR programs under scrutiny. Why This Question Matters In global practice, DRs are understood to be backed by the foreign securities they reference, giving investors economic exposure that closely mirrors direct ownership. When the issuer does not hold the underlying securities directly, the risk profile shifts to the strength of its custodial, hedging, and liquidity arrangements. Those arrangements determine whether DR holders receive equivalent economic and voting rights, how corporate actions are transmitted, and whether conversions or redemptions can be completed in full and on time. In Thailand, the standardized DR disclosure templates and the express allowance for global custodians indicate a regulatory focus on transparency and structural safeguards that preserve these outcomes, even if the issuer’s name does not appear on the foreign share register. Thai Rules for DR Offerings Thai DR offerings are governed by specific Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) notifications and standardized prospectus forms. These instruments establish the disclosure regime for DR structures, risk factors, and the issuer’s arrangements to support the DR program. The framework expressly contemplates the use of a global custodian, indicating that DR issuers are not required to hold the underlying foreign securities directly in their own name if sufficient controls and operational arrangements are in place for the issuer to deliver economic benefits and, where applicable, underlying securities to DR holders when required. More broadly, the relevant SEC
Read More
October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,
Read More
October 1, 2025
In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage. Key Legal Risks The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment. In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment. Director and Executive Qualifications Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in
Read More