A major regulatory shift is underway in Thailand’s e-commerce market. The Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) is expected to publish guidelines targeting digital platform operators — including Shopee, Lazada, and TikTok Shop — in the Royal Gazette in March 2026. Practices long accepted as standard commercial terms, such as opaque fee structures, mandatory use of platform logistics, and algorithmic self-preferencing, are now being brought squarely within the scope of Thailand’s competition law. For Japanese SMEs selling through Thai e-commerce platforms or considering entering the market, this regulatory change demands attention.
Thailand’s E-Commerce Market: Dominance by Three Platforms and the Squeeze on Small Sellers
Thailand’s e-commerce market is estimated at approximately 1.15 trillion baht in 2026 (7% year-on-year growth), dominated by Shopee, Lazada, and TikTok Shop. Shopee alone reportedly generated around 85.79 billion baht in Thailand revenue in 2025, with profits exceeding 5 billion baht (based on media reports).
The problem is that the benefits of this growth are not reaching sellers. When commissions, advertising fees, logistics costs, promotional participation fees, and payment processing fees are combined, the effective cost burden on sellers can reach 15–25% of sales (industry estimates), leaving thin-margin small and medium sellers in a de facto loss-making position. The vertical integration of logistics, advertising, and payments by these platforms has steadily eroded seller autonomy.
TCCT identified these conditions as a competition law concern, officially announcing its regulatory initiative in May 2025. A public consultation on the draft guidelines ran from August to September 2025. The guidelines were submitted to the TCCT board in February 2026 and are expected to take effect upon publication in the Royal Gazette in March 2026.
Six Key Regulatory Areas Under the TCCT Guidelines
The full title of the guidelines is: “Guidelines on the Assessment of Unfair Trade Practices and Monopolistic Behavior of Multi-Sided Platform Operators — Digital Platform Services for the Sale of Goods or Services (E-Commerce).” The legal basis is the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017), which includes extraterritorial application provisions covering platforms incorporated overseas that operate in Thailand.
The guidelines address six categories of conduct.
① Opaque and Unfair Fees
Fee structures covering commissions, advertising, logistics, promotions, and payment processing must be transparent. Applying different rates to sellers without legitimate justification, and parallel pricing arrangements with competing platforms, are flagged as problematic.
② Forced Use of Platform Logistics — The Central Issue
This is the most significant area of the guidelines. Practices by which platforms effectively compel sellers to use their in-house logistics services — such as Shopee’s SPX Express or Lazada Express — are explicitly regulated. Restrictions on a seller’s freedom to choose their own logistics provider will be treated as a violation unless the platform can demonstrate a “legitimate economic, operational, or technical justification.” Notably, the burden of proof rests with the platform.
③ Algorithmic Manipulation and Self-Preferencing
Using search or pricing algorithms to distort competition, and giving preferential placement to the platform’s own products or affiliated sellers, fall within the guidelines’ scope. This mirrors provisions in the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and reflects a global regulatory convergence on platform accountability.
④ Misuse of Seller Data
Using non-public business data obtained from sellers — such as sales data, inventory data, or customer information — to compete against those same sellers in the same product category is prohibited. This issue is well known in the context of Amazon’s “Amazon Basics” controversy in Western markets.
⑤ Pricing Restrictions
Below-cost selling without legitimate justification (predatory pricing), most-favored-nation clauses prohibiting lower prices on competing platforms, and forced participation in major sale events (Double Day sales such as 11.11 and 12.12) are all addressed. Forced participation in promotional events is conceptually similar to “abuse of superior bargaining position” cases that have arisen under Japanese competition law.
⑥ Tying and Forced Bundling
Requiring sellers to use a platform’s proprietary payment gateway or advertising services as a condition of participation is included in the regulatory scope.
A note on penalties: The guidelines themselves function as an interpretive standard under the Trade Competition Act. Penalties are based on the Act itself: administrative sanctions of up to 10% of annual revenue, and criminal penalties of up to two years’ imprisonment and/or fines for confirmed violations.
Practical Implications for Japanese E-Commerce Businesses — Three Scenarios
Scenario A: Japanese Sellers on Thai Platforms (Shopee, etc.)
This group faces the most direct impact.
Potential benefits: Greater fee transparency will make it easier to understand what costs are actually being incurred. Freedom to choose logistics providers allows sellers to match their delivery options to product characteristics and price points. Fairer algorithmic treatment may improve organic product visibility without requiring increased advertising spend.
What to watch: Regulatory effects may materialize gradually. Platforms may not immediately adjust practices following publication of the guidelines, and there may be a lag before TCCT initiates enforcement investigations.
Immediate action: Review your current platform agreements, including fee schedules, logistics policies, and data use terms. Monitor for any contract amendments issued by platforms after the guidelines take effect.
Scenario B: Japanese Companies Running Their Own Thai E-Commerce Sites
Smaller self-operated platforms are unlikely to be direct targets of the guidelines, but may benefit indirectly from a more competitive environment. The emergence of Pantip Mall (discussed below) also presents a potential additional channel worth monitoring.
Scenario C: Japanese Companies Operating as Platform Businesses in Thailand
Documentation of fee structures, explicit policies permitting seller choice of logistics providers, data governance rules, and records of algorithmic design rationale will all become compliance necessities. Building a competition law compliance framework early is strongly advisable.
International Context: EU DMA and Japan’s Transparency Act
Thailand’s TCCT guidelines fit within a broader global pattern of platform regulation.
The EU Digital Markets Act (DMA), in force since 2024, imposes ex ante obligations on designated “gatekeepers,” including prohibitions on self-preferencing, data use restrictions, and interoperability requirements. Penalties reach up to 10% of global annual revenue (20% for repeat violations).
Japan’s Act on Improving Transparency and Fairness in Trading on Specified Digital Platforms (Transparency Act, 2021) requires designated platforms to disclose trading terms and submit annual reports, with a focus on transparency rather than direct prohibition.
Thailand’s approach uses competition law as its vehicle, which makes it somewhat more flexible but also less predictable in terms of enforcement. The substantive content of the guidelines, however, closely parallels the DMA. The practical takeaway: global platform regulation is converging, but Thailand operates through competition law rather than a dedicated platform statute.
For data-related concerns, the intersection with Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) is also worth considering.
Pantip Mall: Can a Thai-Made Platform Compete?
“Pantip Mall,” scheduled to launch in June 2026, is a new e-commerce platform created by Pantip.com — Thailand’s largest online community, with approximately 2.2 million daily users. The platform targets commission rates of 3–8% of transaction value plus a 3.21% payment fee (capped at 11%), positioning itself as a lower-cost alternative to the foreign-owned incumbents.
The broader context is a Thai government policy of “e-commerce sovereignty” — reducing dependence on foreign platforms and protecting Thai SMEs. This aligns directly with the thrust of the TCCT guidelines.
Practically speaking, the gap in logistics infrastructure, user base, and user experience between Pantip Mall and the three incumbents is substantial. Rapid market displacement is unlikely in the near term. That said, for sellers seeking lower-cost channels or companies seeking to align with Thai government policy initiatives, it is a development worth tracking.
Action Checklist for Japanese E-Commerce Businesses
Given the clarity of the regulatory direction, the following steps are worth considering:
- Review your platform agreements — Assess how your current fee, logistics, data, and promotional participation terms may be affected by the new guidelines
- Break down your cost structure — Separate out commissions, advertising, logistics, and payment fees to understand your actual margins
- Monitor platform notifications — Watch for any contract amendments related to fees, logistics policies, or data use terms issued after the guidelines take effect
- Audit your data exposure — Identify what business data you are sharing with platforms and under what usage terms
- Evaluate channel diversification — Reassess the risks of single-platform dependence in light of the new regulatory and competitive landscape
For the cross-border dimension, Thailand’s abolition of customs de minimis thresholds in January 2026 is also relevant for e-commerce sellers (see Thailand Customs De Minimis 2025). For dispute resolution considerations, see our Dispute Resolution Series Part 1.
Thailand’s e-commerce regulatory framework is just beginning to take shape. As the final guidelines are published and enforcement cases accumulate, practical implications will become clearer. We recommend monitoring developments regularly.
For advice on competition law compliance for e-commerce operations in Thailand, platform contract reviews, or cross-border regulatory matters — approached from both Japanese and Thai law perspectives — please feel free to contact us.
This article is for general informational purposes about Thailand’s legal system and does not constitute legal advice under Thai law. For specific matters, please consult a Thai-qualified legal professional. Our firm works in collaboration with JTJB International Lawyers’ Thai-qualified attorneys.