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

October 15, 2021

Thailand Updates Draft Royal Decree on Digital Platforms in Response to Feedback

Subscribe to Updates

In September 2021, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) issued an updated draft royal decree for digital platforms—a potentially far-reaching royal decree that was the subject of a public hearing in July 2021. The ETDA made the changes in response to a considerable amount of feedback and comments from business operators and other stakeholders.

The key changes to the draft royal decree are outlined below.

Definitions

The updated draft broadens the definition of digital platforms subject to the royal decree by removing mention of offering goods, services, or intangible assets, and by deleting a phrase related to contract issues. As a result, “digital platform” currently refers to any intermediary digital platform that provides a connection space for “business operators on a digital platform” and “consumers” via a computer network. Similarly, the definitions of “business operators on a digital platform” and “consumers” have been amended by excluding the offering of intangible assets through digital platforms, and the draft emphasizes that business operators on a digital platform are not included in the definition of consumers.

Notification Exemption

Under the updated draft royal decree, a digital platform provider under the supervision of other authorities or falling under the Electronic Transactions Commission’s list of exempted digital platform providers is exempted from the requirement to notify the ETDA of the operation of its digital platform. The commission may also exempt any other digital platform service as it sees fit.

Extraterritorial Effect

The draft provisions subjecting certain digital platforms located outside Thailand to the royal decree and requiring them to appoint a local representative in Thailand have been updated by removing the requirement to issue a tax invoice to consumers in Thailand. Furthermore, the updated draft makes the local representative subject to the reporting obligations and cessation requirements, whereas these obligations were not prescribed in the previous version of the draft royal decree.

Digital Platform Certification Mark

The updated draft royal decree introduces an ETDA certification mark for digital platforms. Display of the mark appears not to be mandatory, but more specific rules, procedures, and other details will be prescribed at a later stage.

Data Sharing

The draft royal decree authorizes the ETDA to request or collect information in relation to a digital platform from other state agencies, pursuant to the law or contractual terms.

Digital Platform Providers’ Obligations

Obligations of digital platform providers replace the “platform-related requirements” from the previous version of the draft royal decree. The latest draft obligates certain types of digital platform providers (to be announced later by the ETDA) to notify their platform users of necessary information prior to or at the time of service, or upon any amendment to the information (such as altered terms and conditions), which may include the following:

  • Conditions for provision, suspension, or cessation of service (including clear and fair fees, remuneration, and expenses);
  • Criteria used to rank, recommend, or advertise goods or services;
  • Satisfaction ratings and feedback from users;
  • Access and usage of data shared with business operators on the digital platform;
  • Inquiries, complaints, dispute settlement, and timeframe for dispute settlement;
  • Responses to unlawful or sensitive content (including content rating practices); and
  • Any other matters as deemed appropriate.

Criteria that had applied to small businesses have been removed from the updated draft royal decree.

Compliance Timeline

Once the royal decree is enacted and takes effect, digital platform providers will have 30 days to take the actions necessary to ensure compliance. The updated draft royal decree has been proposed to the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society for approval before it is sent to the cabinet for further consideration. While the original expectation was for the royal decree to be adopted by the end of this year, the latest indications are that it may not reach that step until sometime in 2022.

Tilleke & Gibbins will continue to closely monitor the progress of this draft royal decree. For more details about the draft royal decree’s regulatory requirements, please contact Gvavalin Mahakunkitchareon at [email protected] or Thammapas Chanpanich at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 10, 2026
On July 31, 2026, Thailand’s Big Data Institute (BDI) launched a public consultation on the principles of a proposed new data-sharing law, with comments accepted until August 31, 2026. If enacted, the law would establish Thailand’s first comprehensive framework for government and private-sector data sharing, creating a systematic, secure, and transparent regime to support analytics, policymaking, research, and innovation. Central Data-Sharing Platform The draft law establishes a central system for data sharing, managed by the BDI. Government agencies would be required to connect to the BDI’s Data Integration and Intelligence Platform (also referred to as D2), in accordance with the BDI’s rules and procedures. Five Dimensions of Data Sharing The draft law covers five key types of data sharing between government (G), businesses (B), and consumers (C): G2B: Private organizations may request government data specifically for research and development purposes. The BDI will assess the applicant’s data governance, security, and privacy capabilities whether such measures meet prescribed standards before forwarding the request to the relevant government agency within 90 days. Any dispute may be escalated to a newly established Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for final determination. G2G: Government agencies may request data from other agencies through the central system. The data-holding agency must respond within 90 days, taking legality, necessity, proportionality, public interest, and personal data protection into account. Disputes may be referred to the Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for adjudication. B2G: In emergency situations involving public safety, economic security, or disaster response, the Minister of Digital Economy and Society may require private entities to provide data through the central data-sharing system. Government agencies must specify the data requested, demonstrate its necessity and expected benefits, and request only data reasonably available to the data holder. Requests for personal data must be limited to the minimum amount necessary. B2C: Royal decrees may
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,
Read More
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
Read More
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
Read More