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 13, 2024

Thailand to Set Additional Obligations for Specific Digital Marketplaces

Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Committee has publicized a new draft notification detailing additional duties for specific marketplace digital platform service operators under Section 18(2) of the Royal Decree on Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses Subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022). The draft notification, which is open for public comments until November 30, 2024, aims to provide enhanced protection for users of “specific marketplace platforms” (defined below). Some key points of the draft notification are detailed below.

Scope

The draft notification applies to “marketplace digital platform services,” which refers to digital platform services that serve as an intermediary for buying or exchanging goods and provide services to facilitate sale transactions, such as providing communication systems (e.g., chat features), shopping carts, delivery arrangements, and supplemental payment processing facilitation.

“Specific marketplace platforms” refers to Section 18(2) of the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Services, which covers digital platform services that pose risks to financial and commercial security, the reliability and credibility of data messaging systems, or potential harm to the public, and that have a high level of potential impact based on the criteria for assessing the impact of digital platform service operations.

Key Obligations

  • Registration. The draft notification requires the marketplace operators mentioned above to be registered as legal entities in Thailand.
  • Terms and conditions. The draft notification details additional obligations relating to marketplace operators’ terms and conditions:
    • In addition to existing obligations prescribed in the Royal Decree and the relevant subordinate laws, the draft notification emphasizes that the terms and conditions must be in Thai, clear, accessible, and understandable, and may include graphical elements to aid explanation.
    • The terms and conditions must prescribe conditions relating to the sale of products subject to specific standards, such as those restricted under the Food Act, the Drugs Act, and the Industrial Product Standards Act. Such conditions include requiring business users (e.g., merchants on the platform) to obtain and present necessary licenses, permits, or certificates from relevant authorities to the marketplace operator, to counter the sale or advertising of prohibited or infringing products.
  • Verification and authentication. The draft notification proposes two options for the verification of business users who sell products subject to specific standards on the platform:
    • Option one is for marketplace operators to collect certain information about business users and verify their identity by systems that at least meet the Identity Assurance Level 2 (IAL2) requirements.
    • Option two is for marketplace operators to collect and verify information such as the name, address, phone number, email address, and identification documents, as well as bank account details and registration numbers of legal entities, for verification. They must also check this information against the government’s database or request reliable evidence from business users. In this regard, certain information of business users must be made available on the platform for all users (e.g., consumers) to check.
  • Information retention and government oversight. Under the draft notification, marketplace operators must either (1) have in place a business user registry and submit it to the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) every month, or (2) record business users’ information and provide it to the relevant authorities to support the enforcement of other relevant laws, such as the Food Act, the Drugs Act, and the Industrial Product Standards Act. The retention of the business user registry and relevant information is now proposed to be at least 10 years.
  • Sales and advertisement control. Apart from the terms and conditions requirements above, marketplace operators must:
    • Have details relating to business users’ products subject to specific standards available on the platform for users’ examination. These details include, for example, pictures and descriptions; product registration numbers and marks; name, contact details, and other information of manufacturers, importers, and sellers; storage location; and copyright-related details.
    • Check the details of products subject to specific standards against relevant state agencies’ databases and verify the details provided by business users.
    • Display a mark to inform users which products sold on the platform require standard certification, licenses, or permits.
    • Record information relating to user reviews of products, including users’ names and contact details, and implement mechanisms to protect business users from defaming or false reviews or comments.
  • Notice-and-takedown mechanism. Marketplace operators must establish a notice-and-takedown mechanism to allow users to report illegal goods, prohibited goods, and intellectual property rights infringement. The operators must examine and notify users and business users of actions being undertaken within 24 hours and must allow business users to appeal the complaint within 30 days upon receiving a notice from the operators.
  • Actions against noncompliance. Marketplace operators must establish measures against business users who violate or fail to comply with the terms of service, including suspension or termination of services.
  • Reporting requirements. Marketplace operators are required to report on compliance with the draft notification’s requirements to the ETDA together with the annual report every year.

Status

After the public hearing period, which runs until November 15, 2024, the draft notification may undergo further revisions before it is issued and made legally binding.

For more information or assistance regarding the draft notification and public hearing period, please contact Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected], or Karnravee Jitvilai at [email protected].

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore
August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one