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

July 19, 2022

Thailand’s SEC Opens Public Hearing Period on ICO Portal Regulations

Subscribe to Updates

On June 23, 2022, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) opened a public hearing period on regulatory controls for initial coin offering (ICO) portals that serve as financial advisors to digital token issuers. The proposed measures aim to prevent conflicts of interest; allow ICO portals to outsource certain functions; and establish additional notification obligations for ICO portals.

The public hearing is open for general comments until July 23, 2022, and the new legislation is expected to be issued soon after that. During the public hearing period, any interested parties can comment on the SEC’s proposed principles. The key proposed points are outlined below.

Conflicts of Interest

Similar to SEC-approved financial advisors for securities offerings, ICO portals must be clear of conflicts of interest when representing issuers in a coin offering. According to the draft regulation, the following conflicts of interest are prohibited:

  • The ICO portal (and certain individuals as specified by the SEC) directly or indirectly holds a prohibited amount of shares in the issuer, its affiliates, or its subsidiaries. If the issuer is not a listed company, any shareholding or portion thereof is prohibited. If the issuer is a listed company on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), the shares held by the ICO platform may not total more than five percent of the total voting rights.
  • The issuer (and certain individuals as specified by the SEC) directly or indirectly holds shares in the ICO portal in any amount if the ICO portal is not a listed company, or totaling more than five percent of the voting rights if the ICO portal is listed on the SET.
  • Any of the ICO portal’s directors or executives, or the head of the department responsible for screening the ICO project, is also a director in the issuer.
  • The ICO portal has a relationship with, or any interest in, the issuer in a way that could impede the independence of the ICO portal with respect to conducting its duties.

Outsourcing ICO Portal Functions

To increase efficiency, ICO portals will be allowed to outsource certain tasks, subject to the following conditions:

  • The ICO portal must adopt an outsourcing policy, measures, and procedures (approved by the board of directors), to be reviewed annually or upon any event that might have a material impact on business operations.
  • The scope of outsourced tasks must be appropriate, reasonable, and not so substantial that the ICO portal will become an entity with no business operations (an “empty box”). ICO portals may only outsource tasks relating to digital token offerings, such as contacting and providing services to investors, and supporting digital token offerings and subscription management. Core tasks, such as screening ICO projects, may not be outsourced.
  • The ICO portal must notify the SEC within 15 days when it outsources a task to a third party, when there is a significant change to the outsourcing, or when the third party subcontracts any task to another party.

Additional Notification Obligations

To facilitate additional supervisory control, ICO portals will have to notify the SEC within 15 days if there are any changes to their qualifications, personnel, and functions, or if the ICO portal is unable to maintain the necessary qualifications or comply with the requirements detailed in the relevant section of SEC Notification No. GorJor. 16/2561 Re: Criteria, Provisions, and Procedure for Approval of an ICO Portal Service Provider. In the notification, the ICO portal must identify the cause and report on any remedial measures planned or already taken.

If an ICO portal wishes to suspend operations, it must also notify the SEC and provide a list of unfinished tasks along with a plan to mitigate any potential impact on customers. When the ICO portal wishes to resume operations, it must again notify the SEC and explain how it has resolved the issues that caused the suspension of operations, along with any significant changes to the portal’s characteristics.

Tilleke & Gibbins will continue to monitor these ICO portal regulations and provide updates as needed. For more information on any aspect of digital asset business, cryptocurrency, digital tokens, or digital asset regulations in Thailand, please contact Kobkit Thienpreecha at [email protected], Onunya Chanpen at [email protected], or Sorawit Partomtanasarn at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Practices

Banking and Finance

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 10, 2026
Thailand has introduced new regulatory guidance requiring digital platform operators to adopt structured, transparent, and fair fee practices. On March 16, 2026, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) published Announcement No. DPS 2/2569, titled “Guidelines for Transparency and Fairness in Digital Platform Service Fee Determination,” issued under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Business Operations B.E. 2565 (2022). The guidelines establish a framework governing how digital platform operators should set, disclose, and adjust fees charged to users and related service providers such as logistics and payment providers. Although framed as best-practice guidance rather than legally binding rules with explicit penalties, the guidelines carry regulatory weight under the royal decree and represent a significant step toward structured governance of digital platform fee practices in Thailand. The guidelines establish various transparency principles and divide fees into two distinct categories—compulsory and additional—with specific governance principles for each. Transparency Principles The guidelines recommend that digital platform operators adopt several transparency measures to ensure that users can fully understand the costs of using a platform. Fee catalog. All fees should be consolidated into a single, accessible location, which should include the fee name, definition, scope of covered services, calculation methodology, rate, billing period, and calculation examples. Minimum service disclosure. Operators should disclose the minimum service that users can expect, such as baseline visibility, product listing capabilities, access to transaction data, and back-end dashboard access. Price structure disclosure. Operators should disclose the categories of costs underlying their fees, such as system maintenance, cybersecurity, and operational costs. While exact cost figures need not be made public, operators should be able to provide numerical data to regulators upon request. Clear fee formulas. Fee calculations should be simple and easy to understand—for example, percentage of net sales, cost per order, or cost per product listing. Operators should
Read More
April 10, 2026
As digital commerce continues to reshape consumer behavior in Thailand, the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) has been taking steps to review and update key regulations for online platforms. The OCPB has had a particular focus on addressing the risks posed by e-marketplace businesses—from misleading product information to fraudulent online transactions. Some of the regulator’s current legislative efforts related to Thailand’s labeling regulations as well as potential changes to the country’s law on direct sales and marketing. Proposed Changes to Consumer Protection Labeling Regulations On February 24, 2026, the OCPB convened a public hearing to review the Notification of the Committee on Labels re: Specification of Goods as Controlled Label Goods B.E. 2565 (2022) and its annex issued under the Consumer Protection Act. The closed-door session, which started the OPCD’s process of seeking feedback on the proposed changes, brought together representatives from government agencies, business operators, and consumer groups. The OCPB explained that its review of the labeling regulations aims to address regulatory gaps arising from evolving commercial practices, particularly the expansion of e-commerce and cross-border transactions. Authorities highlighted recurring issues involving product information that is unclear, incomplete, or potentially misleading in digital sales channels. The proposed revisions are intended to improve consumers’ access to accurate and complete product information, ensure that label disclosures remain relevant amid the growth of e-commerce, and strengthen protections against deceptive or misleading digital advertising. The review is being undertaken pursuant to the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979). As part of the initiative, the OCPB signaled a potential update to the categories of “controlled label products” as well as enhanced disclosure obligations for business operators, with the broader aim of promoting greater transparency, reinforcing operator accountability, and aligning Thailand’s labeling framework with current market conditions. The OCPB secretary general emphasized that
Read More
April 9, 2026
As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities. The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data. Structure of the Consultation Process According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases: Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA. Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations. Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder
Read More
April 3, 2026
On March 16, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security released a draft version of a new Decree on the Prevention and Combating of Cybercrime and High-Tech Crime to replace the currently effective Decree 25/2014/ND-CP. In the draft, the ministry has proposed a comprehensive regulatory framework aimed at addressing violations occurring within the cybersecurity domain, including measures related to intellectual property. Acts of Online IP Infringement Article 9 of the draft decree notably introduces specific provisions addressing online intellectual property infringement, with detailed lists of acts considered to constitute infringement in the online environment. Copyright and related rights infringement includes: Uploading or sharing works, performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcasts, computer programs, software, research, documents, theses, or other intellectual creations on digital platforms without the consent of the rights holder. Unauthorized livestreaming of copyrighted television programs, sporting events, or artistic performances. Uploading, sharing, storing, transmitting, or providing links to infringing works or digital content via websites, social networks, applications, or digital platforms. Providing or using software, tools, devices, or access codes to circumvent technological protection measures or evade lawful control mechanisms implemented by rights holders. Using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to replicate the ideas or structure of another person’s work without significant new creativity or without proper attribution, thereby causing damage to the original author. Industrial property infringement includes: Manufacturing, trading, advertising, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing counterfeit trademarks, geographical indications, or industrial designs, as well as goods infringing industrial property rights through online platforms. Unauthorized registration, appropriation, or use of domain names, account names, or digital identifiers that create confusion regarding the rights holder or the origin of goods or services. Producing, using, or offering for sale products containing all or part of a patented invention via online platforms. Advertising or introducing products with technical features or characteristics identical
Read More