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

Subscribe to Updates

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 Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More
February 26, 2026
Thailand is preparing to offer new tools for intellectual property enforcement as the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) recently released for public consultation a draft notification requiring social media platforms to verify user identities and conduct know-your-customer (KYC) checks on advertisers. The draft Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers, which is to be issued under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023), as amended in 2025, primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes. However, its new obligations also provide IP owners with valuable tools to identify anonymous infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The draft notification imposes several verification requirements on social media platforms operating in Thailand. These requirements also strengthen IP rights holders’ ability to identify anonymous infringers, as platforms must: Verify user identities through registered phone numbers and link all accounts to verifiable identities. Conduct KYC checks on advertisers, including individuals, companies, and any third-party payers. Perform heightened identity checks for high-risk or repeat offenders before publishing advertisements. Promptly remove content flagged by the Anti-Technology Crime Division and prescreen advertisements for prohibited or high-risk content. How IP Owners Can Use This Notification for Enforcement The phone number–based verification requirement enables IP owners to work more effectively with enforcement authorities in tracing individuals or entities responsible for infringing content. The comprehensive advertiser KYC obligations, including mandatory disclosure of third-party payment sources, create a clear audit trail even when bad actors attempt to obscure their identity through intermediaries or shell accounts. This traceability is essential for pursuing damages and dismantling organized counterfeit operations. The ETDA is now considering adjustments to the draft notification after receiving comments during the public consultation period, which ended on February 2, 2026. Following finalization
Read More
February 23, 2026
On February 17, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) released its draft Guidelines on Personal Data Protection in the Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. The draft guidelines, which translate data controller and data processor compliance obligations under the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) into measures tailored to AI development and deployment, are open for public comment until February 25, 2026. At a public hearing session on the draft guidelines held on February 19, the PDPC emphasized that its approach to AI is not to hinder innovation but to develop practical guidance supporting safe deployment while ensuring data protection. Although the guidelines are not legally binding, they indicate the regulator’s expectations and the likely direction of interpretation and enforcement. Scope of Application and Role of Stakeholders The guidelines will apply to all data controllers and data processors in Thailand, and to overseas data controllers and data processors whose data processing falls within the extraterritorial scope of the PDPA. The draft guidelines distinguish the roles of parties involved in AI deployment. Users of AI who determine the purpose of use and designate the input data, and retain outputs generated by the AI, are considered data controllers. In contrast, AI model providers or system integrators that process personal data under the instructions of the data controller are generally regarded as data processors. However, if an AI model provider utilizes user data for its own purposes, such as model fine-tuning or training, it may instead be classified as a data controller. Key Obligations for AI Data Collection and Use The basic principles of data processing under the PDPA must be maintained throughout the AI implementation lifecycle, from design to decommissioning, emphasizing accountability and privacy-by-design principles. The draft guidelines also stipulate the following: Data processing agreements (DPAs) should include model training prohibitions,
Read More