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

June 5, 2020

Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act: A Guide to the Partial Compliance Extension

Subscribe to Updates

In May 2020, the Thai Cabinet approved a royal decree granting a one-year exemption from certain provisions of the Personal Data Protection Act 2019 (PDPA), which had been scheduled to take full effect on May 27, 2020. The new decree has extended the effective date for a number of the law’s provisions to May 31, 2021.

Key Elements of the Extension

Under the decree, certain critical provisions of the PDPA are not enforceable against exempted businesses (see list below) during the extension period, including the following:

  • General requirements and obligations on data controllers. Specifically, the postponed enforcement covers consent requirements, notification requirements, establishment of lawful basis, requirements on the collection of personal data from other sources, and processing of minors’ personal data. The enforcement of a second list of requirements is also postponed, including observance of data subjects’ rights and data erasure or destruction requirements, the implementation of appropriate internal security measures to prevent unauthorized access (section 37 (1)), provision of data breach notifications, appointment of data protection officers (DPOs), filing complaints, and penalties.
  • The grandfather provision (section 95) is also within the scope of the extension. This means that personal data collected or processed during the extension period will not be subject to the requirements enumerated in the second list above when they come into force in 2021. Furthermore, this data can be retained and used after the extension period has lapsed, provided that doing so is within the original purposes stated for collecting and processing the personal data. It is especially important to note that the scope of the grandfather provision does not include disclosure of personal data or processing of personal data outside of the original purposes stated.

However, as required by section 4, data controllers must still implement a minimum level of security protection measures for personal data in accordance with the standards to be prescribed by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, expected later this year.

It should also be noted that the requirement for the regulator to issue supplemental notifications and regulations is not within the scope of the extension. The Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) is therefore expected to continue issuing these supplemental measures during the extension period.

Exempted Businesses

The list of exempted businesses, below, covers a wide range of sectors and industries, and applies regardless of location:

  • Agriculture
  • Industrial businesses
  • Commerce
  • Medical and public health businesses
  • Energy, steam, water, waste disposal, and related businesses
  • Construction
  • Repair and maintenance
  • Transportation, logistics, and warehousing
  • Tourism
  • Communication, telecommunications, computers, and digital enterprises
  • Financial, banking, and insurance enterprises
  • Real estate
  • Professional practice
  • Administration and support
  • Science and technology, academia, social welfare, and arts
  • Education
  • Entertainment and recreation
  • Security
  • Household operations and SMEs that cannot be classified
  • Government agencies
  • Foreign government agencies and international organizations
  • Foundations, associations, and religious and nonprofit organizations

What to Do Now

In addition to staying up to date on the issuance and implementation of supplemental notifications and regulations under the PDPA over the coming year, businesses should make use of the additional time to prepare for compliance. A sample framework for doing so is provided below.

Step 1: Identify the personal data currently possessed by the company

Estimated timeframe: 1–3 months

In this stage, it is important to understand the PDPA’s requirements and conduct self-assessments to identify an entity’s current and anticipated personal data processing activities. To identify the main processing activities, companies should answer the five Ws:

  • Who are the relevant data subjects and the responsible personnel?
  • What types of personal data are collected and processed, and what are the sources?
  • When is the personal data collected and updated, and how long is it retained?
  • Where is the physical and digital data stored and transferred to (i.e. within Thailand or overseas)?
  • Why is the personal data being collected or processed?

This should be a reported in an internal assessment to aid widespread understanding of the practice—especially the original purpose for collecting or processing the personal data—within the organization.

Gaps and mitigation measures should also be identified, including:

  • processing activities that require consent as the lawful basis;
  • processing activities that can rely on another lawful basis (e.g. “legitimate interest”);
  • relevant retention periods pertaining to the various types of personal data; and
  • list of data processors, the scope of their data processing activities, and relevant personal data pertaining to the activities.

Step 2: Close the gaps and monitoring for new subordinate regulations

Estimated Timeframe: 2-4 months for closing gaps, monitoring ongoing until May 31, 2021

In this stage, organizations should monitor the issuance and development of new subordinate legislation—including through public hearings—to ensure that they are aware of their compliance obligations. At the same time, it will be necessary to focus also on closing the gaps identified in Step 1 by implementing the necessary mitigation measures and putting measures in place to ensure operational compliance. This may include preparing the following:

Privacy policies for relevant data subjects. Where consent is identified as the lawful basis, consent forms must be prepared for the relevant data subjects (e.g. individual customers, employees, etc.).

  • A data processing agreement (or addendum) template to be arranged, proposed, and countersigned by the relevant data processors.
  • A record of processing activities.
  • A record of internal assessments where legitimate interest is to be relied upon as the lawful basis (noting that these should be carried out in consideration of organizational conflicts of interest).
  • Plans for a DPO or DPO team, depending on the size of the operation and quantity of personal data involved, and in accordance with the DPO qualifications prescribed by the PDPC.
  • A custom internal training program, addressing current gaps and relevant parties in the context of the new legal requirements.
  • Internal rules forbidding collection of personal data without justification or lawful basis, or that is not necessary for business operations. Any personal data of this type that is currently being processed should also be deleted at this time.

When the subordinate laws on data subject rights become publicly available, it will be necessary to examine the requirements and set up a process for managing requests to uphold data subject rights, as well as data controller and processor obligations under the PDPA.

Achieving Compliance on Schedule

By following these steps, organizations can ensure that they will be fully compliant when the extension period ends on May 31, 2021. The estimated timeframes of the various steps listed above can give an idea of how long each step will take, but the actual schedules should be determined based on the level of PDPA readiness within the organization, the scale of implementation, and any future developments of the subordinate legislation under the PDPA. Companies should work closely with local legal counsel to ensure that their compliance measures are on track, and will be effective when the law comes into force.

Tilleke & Gibbins will continue to monitor the development of the PDPA and provide updates as they emerge. If you have questions about the PDPA, or any other aspect of data compliance in Thailand, please do not hesitate to contact any member of the PDPA team, including Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected] or Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected].

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 23, 2026
On May 26, 2026, Thailand’s Department of Land Transport (DLT) published for public consultation a draft amendment to the Ministerial Regulation on Electronic Ride-Hailing Vehicles that would, for the first time, allow juristic persons (legal entities) to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars—a right that currently belongs exclusively to natural persons, limited to one person per one vehicle. If finalized in its current form, the regulation would significantly expand the supply side of Thailand’s ride-hailing market by enabling corporate fleet operators to enter the space. The public comment period is open through June 24, 2026. Key Principles Under the Draft Regulation Under the proposed amendment, juristic persons that maintain a fleet of at least 50 vehicles will be permitted to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars. This represents a fundamental shift from the current framework, which restricts registration to individual natural persons on a one-person-one-car basis. Vehicle Specifications Corporate-owned ride-hailing vehicles must meet the following requirements: Be brand new from the factory, or no more than two years old from first registration with no more than 20,000 km of use. Not be a vehicle that has been reconstructed or repaired after involvement in a serious accident affecting safety—a standard consistent with public transport vehicles (RorYor. 6). Be classified as small, medium, or large in accordance with ministerial or director-general specifications. The vehicles may be equipped with safety devices such as interior or exterior cameras (video/photo recording) and can retain the original factory color of the vehicle body (no mandatory color change is required). License Plates Corporate ride-hailing vehicles will use license plates of the same size, characteristics, and color as those for private passenger vehicles not exceeding seven seats (RorYor. 1), rather than public transport plates. Potential Impact The government has stated that the regulation is intended to: Promote
Read More
June 23, 2026
On May 14, 2026, Thailand published a ministerial regulation in the Government Gazette to prescribe measures for prevention and suppression of technology crimes. The regulation creates a comprehensive procedural framework for returning money and digital assets to victims of technology crimes. It will take effect 90 days after publication (in mid-August 2026), giving affected entities a limited window to prepare. Mandatory Reporting Obligations for Financial Institutions When a deposit account, e-money account, or digital asset wallet is frozen in connection with a technology crime, the relevant financial institution or business operator must report transaction data to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) via AMLO’s designated electronic system. Required data elements include account numbers (sender and receiver), names, identification or passport numbers, legal entity registration numbers, phone numbers, remaining balance, damage amount, transaction reference numbers, and the bank case ID. Institutions that already share data through the information-sharing system under the emergency decree are deemed to have satisfied this reporting obligation, creating an incentive for platform participation. When the Royal Thai Police or the Department of Special Investigation seize or freeze assets related to technology crimes, they must provide AMLO with investigation reports, complaint evidence, money-trail data, and account statements. Notification and Claims Process Once the AMLO secretary-general approves verified reports of a technology crime, the account information of persons connected to the crime will be published in the Government Gazette, triggering a 90-day window for victims to file claims and for related persons to file objections. Officers will also publish details on AMLO’s electronic media and send registered mail to identified victims, which will be deemed received after 7 days domestically or 15 days internationally. Victims have 90 days from the date the crime is published in the Government Gazette to file claims through AMLO’s electronic system. Claims must include
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More