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

April 10, 2025

Thailand Updates Draft Notification on Additional Obligations for Online Marketplaces

Subscribe to Updates

After making revisions to the initial draft notification released in November 2024, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released an updated draft Notification on Additional Obligations for Digital Platform Service Operators of Online Marketplaces for Goods with Specific Characteristics under Section 18(2) of the Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses Subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022) B.E. … . A focus group session was also held to gather feedback from business operators.

Below is a summary of key provisions in the new draft.

Unchanged Items

Some key concerns that remain unchanged from the previous version of the draft notification include the following:

  • Offshore business operators running online marketplaces that act as intermediaries for the sale or exchange of goods and provide facility services for the sale of goods (referred to as “specific marketplace operators” in the draft) are required to establish a local entity in Thailand. However, the criteria for determining which operators are specific marketplace operators are still under discussion due to feedback from business operators.
  • Specific marketplace operators must submit a compliance report to the ETDA along with their annual report each year.
  • Specific marketplace operators must verify that “business users” (e.g., merchants) provide complete details about goods in accordance with product standardization requirements.

Removed Obligations

The updated draft notification has removed specific marketplace operators’ obligations to:

  • Conduct Identity Assurance Level 2 (IAL2) verification of business users before onboarding them on their platforms.
  • Submit a registry of business users’ information to the ETDA.
  • Retain business users’ information for a specified retention period.
  • Implement measures to filter reviews of products subject to specific standards.

Revisions

Key revisions made to the draft notification include the following:

  • The effective date has been extended to 120 days after the notification’s publication in the Government Gazette, up from 60 days in the previous draft.
  • The term “products subject to specific standards” now includes three additional categories of regulated goods: medical devices, herbal products, and hazardous substances. This expansion aims to cover all products regulated by Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as the intention of this notification is to encompass products under the supervision of both the Thai Industrial Standards Institute and the FDA.
  • The information that must be reported to the ETDA now includes:
    • The number and proportion of goods on the platform that are subject to product standards.
    • The number and proportion of business users selling or advertising such goods.
    • Data on removed goods and business users, including the number of removals.
    • Complaint handling statistics, including the number and proportion of complaints related to products subject to specific standards.
  • Instead of conducting IAL2 verification of business users, specific marketplace operators must collect certain information from business users, such as name, address, phone number, email address, a copy of their identification document (or electronic version), and bank account details.
  • Specific marketplace operators must have business users conduct self-certification for compliance with laws regarding products subject to specific standards.
  • The maximum complaint response period for specific marketplace operators is changed from 24 hours to 3 days.

Timeline

The ETDA is gathering feedback from relevant operators and will present the draft notification to the agency’s Electronic Transactions Committee in April 2025. Once the draft is finalized and approved by the committee, it will be published and implemented shortly after.

Related Professionals

Industries

Consumer Products

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 15, 2025
Thailand has established new safe harbor rules that require social media platforms to remove specified content within 24 hours of government notification. On July 5, 2025, the Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers was issued and took effect. This followed a hearing in May 2025 where only a select group of social media and online communication platform operators were invited to attend and comment on draft rules that could exempt social media platform operators from joint liability under the amended Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes in cases involving victims of technological crimes. Safe Harbor Rules The notification stipulates procedures that must be followed in order to receive the protection of the safe harbor rules. Upon being notified by the Division of Prevention and Suppression of Cybercrime, Office of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) of the presence of false or misleading information that may lead to the commission of a technological crime, social media service providers must immediately take down the specified content, with a maximum allowable turnaround time of 24 hours from the time of receiving the notification. Social media service providers are required to promptly report the outcome of each takedown to the MDES Division of Prevention and Suppression. This shift in Thailand’s regulatory approach to social media content moderation establishes clear government oversight mechanisms while providing platforms with liability protection for compliance. As the new rules took immediate effect, social media platforms need to ensure that they have adequate systems and processes in place to comply with the requirements.
Read More
July 11, 2025
Vietnam’s recent embrace of “regulatory sandboxes” reflects a deliberate policy choice to balance the need for robust oversight with an equally pressing imperative to catalyze innovation. A sandbox is a controlled, time-bound framework in which businesses may pilot emerging technologies, products, or business models under relaxed or tailor-made regulatory requirements, thereby allowing regulators to observe risks in real time while innovators validate commercial viability without bearing the full weight of the traditional compliance regime. By issuing sandbox regulations, the government of Vietnam is signaling its commitment to accelerating digital transformation, attracting investment, and developing a knowledge-based economy, all while safeguarding financial stability, consumer protection, and national security. This strategy is embodied in a suite of instruments that together establish sector-specific sandboxes: Decree No. 94/2025/ND-CP on the Regulatory Sandbox in the Banking Sector (Fintech Sandbox Decree), effective July 1, 2025. Law on Digital Technology Industry (DTI Law), effective January 1, 2026, and Law on Science, Technology and Innovation (STI Law), effective October 1, 2025. Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 on International Financial Centers (IFC Resolution), effective September 1, 2025. In addition, a draft resolution on the pilot implementation of the crypto-asset market (Draft Crypto Pilot Resolution) is expected to introduce a dedicated sandbox for crypto-asset service providers later this year, further underscoring Vietnam’s holistic, forward-looking approach to regulating emerging technologies. Below is a brief summary of all the regulatory sandboxes, who they are open for, and what businesses are attracted. Fintech Sandbox Decree Under the Fintech Sandbox Decree, besides credit institutions and foreign bank branches, fintech companies operating in Vietnam can apply for a Certificate of Sandbox Participation issued by the State Bank of Vietnam to operate any of the following services in Vietnam: Credit scoring: A solution applicable to information technology systems of credit institutions, branches of foreign banks, and fintech
Read More
July 11, 2025
On June 10, 2025, Thailand’s Supreme Administrative Court accepted for consideration a pivotal lawsuit concerning the regulatory obligations of administrative agencies over internet-based television broadcasting services, commonly referred to as over-the-top (OTT) services. This court’s decision in the case may set important precedents for how OTT platforms are regulated, especially regarding consumer protections and advertising practices. Background A user of an OTT television application initiated legal action against the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) and related officials, alleging that the lack of clear regulatory criteria and oversight allowed OTT operators to broadcast general television content while compelling users to view advertisements before and during programming. The plaintiff argued this constituted consumer exploitation and claimed that the responsible authorities neglected or delayed their statutory duties under the Act on the Organization to Assign Radio Frequencies and Regulate Broadcasting, Television, and Telecommunications Services B.E. 2553 (2010). Initially, the Central Administrative Court declined to accept the lawsuit. However, on appeal, the Supreme Administrative Court determined that the claim fell within its jurisdiction, noting that OTT television services—defined under section 4 of the governing act—are subject to the same regulatory framework as traditional television services, regardless of the transmission method (frequency, cable, internet, or other system). Implications for OTT Services The key implications for OTT services concern the following issues: Regulatory oversight: The court recognized that OTT television services are explicitly covered under Thailand’s broadcast regulatory regime. Regulatory agencies may be compelled to establish clear operational rules and oversight mechanisms for OTT providers. Consumer protections: The plaintiff’s claim that excessive or unavoidable in-program advertising constitutes consumer exploitation was acknowledged as a matter of public interest. This may prompt stricter advertising standards for OTT platforms. Licensing requirements: The case raises the prospect that OTT operators may be required to obtain licenses from the
Read More
July 10, 2025
For companies and individuals doing business in Vietnam, a common question is whether electronic signatures (e-signatures) are legally recognized under Vietnamese law. This matter is governed by Law No. 20/2023/QH15 on Electronic Transactions issued on June 22, 2023 (ETL 2023) and its guiding legal documents such as Decree No. 23/2025/ND-CP dated February 21, 2025, and Circular 06/2024/TT-BTTTT dated July 1, 2024 (Circular 06). Recognition of Validity of E-signatures in Vietnam As a general principle, the ETL 2023 confirms that an e-signature cannot be denied legal validity solely due to its electronic form. The law categorizes e-signatures into three types: Type 1: Specialized e-signatures for organizations Type 2: Public digital signatures for individuals and organizations Type 3: Specialized digital signatures for government agencies Among these types, only secure specialized e-signatures (a secure e-signature of type 1) and digital signatures (type 2) are explicitly granted the same legal validity as handwritten (wet) signatures. This distinction is particularly important in legal disputes and for transactions with government agencies. (For more details, please refer to our previous article.) Domestic e-signatures A domestic organization can choose to use secure specialized e-signatures (type 1) and/or digital signatures (type 2) while a Vietnam-based individual can choose digital signatures (type 2) for their transactions—particularly for those involving government agencies and transactions of high value and complexity which require stronger legal protection. Specialized e-signatures (type 1) can be created by the organizations themselves, and additionally must be “secure” to be explicitly recognized as having the same legal validity as handwritten signatures. For clarity, “secure” specialized e-signatures are those certified (granted a safety certificate) by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MST). (This was formerly the responsibility of the Ministry of Information and Communications, which was merged with MST under Vietnam’s 2025 administrative restructuring.) Digital signatures (type 2) are
Read More