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​ 

July 27, 2026
A new decree on penalties for violations related to the crypto asset market creates compliance risks for offshore crypto asset exchanges in Vietnam that do not hold, and practically cannot obtain, a Vietnamese license, and for Vietnamese users who continue to transact on those platforms. Decree No. 284/2026/ND-CP (Decree 284), issued by the government of Vietnam on July 16, 2026, formally establishes an administrative penalty framework for violations related to crypto assets and the crypto asset market. The decree takes effect on September 1, 2026, and will remain in force for the duration of the five-year pilot program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP, which is scheduled to end in September 2030. Direct Penalties on Vietnamese Users The most immediate commercial risk to offshore platforms is that their Vietnamese users now face direct personal liability for using their exchanges. Vietnamese users who trade crypto assets outside of a Ministry of Finance-licensed service provider face fines of up to VND 50 million (approximately USD 1,900). Vietnamese users trading in crypto assets that are offered or issued to foreign users face higher penalties of up to VND 100 million (approximately USD 3,800). It is expected that Vietnamese users will be more willing to migrate away from offshore platforms now that there is a risk of real enforcement against them. Penalties on Unlicensed Service Providers Violations of providing crypto asset services or advertising crypto-related services without a license face fines of up to VND 200 million (approximately USD 7,700). Operating a crypto asset trading market without proper authorization falls within the same highest penalty bands. Organizations that violate issuance, provision, or disclosure rules may face fines of up to VND 200 million. Although the maximum administrative fine per violation is capped at VND 200 million for organizations and VND 100 million for individuals, these
Read More
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
Read More
July 20, 2026
On July 16, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a notification in the Government Gazette establishing detailed rules governing data subjects’ right of access under section 30 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The notification will take effect 60 days after publication—mid-September 2026—giving data controllers a limited window to bring their processes into compliance. Scope The notification covers requests to access or obtain copies of personal data and requests for disclosure of the source of data collected without consent. Data subjects may exercise their rights directly or through authorized representatives. Key Requirements Important requirements set by the notification include the following: Required request channels. Controllers must provide at least two request channels: direct submission at the business location and registered mail. Electronic channels are optional but, if offered, may also be used for fulfilling requests. Request contents. Requests must be in writing or in electronic form and include the data subject’s name, the preferred access method, details of the data requested, and the requester’s signature. Controllers may request additional identifying information as needed. Identity and authority verification. Controllers may require official identity documents for verification. Authorized representatives must provide authorization documents and identity documents for both the data subject and the representative. Alternative verification methods (e.g., digital authentication) are permitted if they do not unreasonably obstruct data subjects’ rights. Review and response timelines. Controllers must review requests within 15 days. If the request is incomplete, the controller must notify the requester and allow at least 15 days to correct deficiencies. If not corrected, the request may be treated as abandoned. Once verified, controllers must fulfill requests within 30 days, extendable by another 30 days for large-volume or complex requests with notice to the requester. Methods for providing access or copies. Controllers may fulfill
Read More
July 16, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a series of draft guidance documents for public consultation on July 7, 2026. Issued under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), the drafts address a range of compliance issues and offer insight into the regulator’s current enforcement priorities. This article examines two of those drafts: one on lawful bases for processing personal data, and another on marketing and direct marketing. Together, they reflect the Office of the PDPC’s evolving expectations on lawful-basis selection, accountability, and the use of personal data in marketing. Organizations operating in Thailand should assess the practical implications now, before the guidance is finalized. Lawful Bases: A Structured Selection Process The draft guidance on lawful bases introduces a systematic five-step process for selecting an appropriate lawful basis for each processing activity. Organizations are expected to: Identify the processing activity involved. Assess the appropriate lawful basis. Evaluate whether the data is necessary for the processing. Conduct a legitimate interest assessment (LIA) where applicable. Ensure transparency through privacy notices. The guidance provides practical explanations and examples for each lawful basis under section 24 of the PDPA—including archiving, research, statistics, vital interests, contractual necessity, legal obligation, public task, legitimate interests, and consent—as well as the bases applicable to sensitive personal data under section 26. The aim is to promote more consistent and accurate lawful-basis selection across public- and private-sector organizations. A recurring theme throughout the guidance is that organizations should select the lawful basis that most accurately reflects the actual purpose and circumstances of the processing activity. The guidance cautions against treating consent as a default or catch-all basis where another lawful basis is more appropriate. For processing based on legitimate interests, organizations should conduct and document an LIA. Processing involving sensitive personal data may require
Read More