%20(3).png)
Thailand Issues New Guidelines on Unfair Trade Practices for Multi-Sided Platforms
- Lexpertise Law Firm
- 2 hours ago
- 3 min read
Thailand’s Trade Competition Commission (“TCC”) has issued a significant new notification establishing guidelines for determining unfair trade practices, monopolisation, and conduct that may reduce or restrict competition in multi-sided platforms, marking a key regulatory development for the digital economy.
The notification, published in the Government Gazette on 24 March 2026, provides a structured framework for assessing whether the conduct of digital platforms, particularly e-commerce platforms, may violate the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017).
What Are Multi-Sided Platforms?
The notification defines “multi-sided platforms” as intermediaries that connect two or more distinct user groups, enabling them to interact, transact, or rely on each other’s services within a shared ecosystem. This includes e-commerce platforms linking businesses such as sellers, logistics providers, digital media advertisers, and payment service providers.
By facilitating these interactions, such platforms often benefit from network effects, data-driven insights, and algorithm-based systems. While these features enhance efficiency and scalability, they may also give rise to market power and potential competition concerns, particularly where platforms act as key gatekeepers.
Key Categories of Conduct Under Review
The notification sets out detailed categories of conduct that may be considered anti-competitive. These are broadly divided into pricing practices and non-pricing practices.
1. Pricing Practices
The TCC will closely scrutinise the following pricing-related behaviours:
Below-Cost Pricing
Requiring or forcing sellers to offer goods or services below their average cost.
Rate Parity Clauses
Restricting sellers from offering more favourable prices on other platforms or channels, subject to certain exceptions.
Resale Price Maintenance
Imposing fixed resale prices and penalising non-compliance, for example by refusing to deal with or removing sellers from the platform.
Unfair Fees or Charges
Imposing commissions, advertising fees, logistics fees, payment fees, or other benefits without reasonable justification. This may include:
Excessive pricing
Parallel pricing practices
Fees or charges set below average cost (subject to certain exceptions)
Fees or charges below variable cost imposed on sellers, carriers, digital media advertisers, or payment channels with the intention of predatory pricing
Price discrimination
Imposing unreasonable financial burdens or failing to provide adequate prior notice
Direct or Indirect Price Manipulation
Engaging in conduct that unfairly affects the price of goods or services, including the use of algorithmic systems (such as price ranking mechanisms) without reasonable justification.
2. Non-Pricing Practices
The guidelines also address a wide range of non-price conduct, including:
Visibility Reduction and Self-Preferencing
Manipulating search rankings or platform visibility to favour the platform’s own products, services, or preferred partners without reasonable justification.
Coercion of Business Users
Forcing sellers to:
use specific logistics or payment services,
participate in promotional campaigns (e.g. “double-date” sales), or
purchase advertising services.
Exclusive Dealing and Platform Restrictions
Preventing sellers from operating on competing platforms, including through account suspension, delisting, or refusal to deal.
Tying and Bundling Practices: Requiring the use of additional services or imposing bundled conditions.
Discriminatory Treatment
Unequal treatment of similarly situated business users, such as:
ranking discrimination, or
unequal allocation of orders or logistics services.
Use of Data to Gain Competitive Advantage
Leveraging third-party data to compete against business users.
Collusive Behaviour
Including coordinated practices such as keyword bidding collusion.
Other Anti-Competitive Conduct
For example:
delayed payments,
sudden changes to commercial terms without adequate notice.
Key Exception: Legitimate Justifications
Importantly, the guidelines recognise that not all such conduct will be unlawful.
A platform’s behaviour may be justified where it is supported by:
Economic, business, or technological necessity
Industry practices or market standards
Conduct that does not materially restrict competition or impose unfair burdens
This reflects a case-by-case assessment approach, balancing innovation and competition.
Practical Implications for Businesses
The new guidelines have significant implications for:
Platform Operators
Must review pricing models, fee structures, and algorithmic systems
Should ensure transparency and justifiable decision-making
Need to assess risk in platform rules, terms, and enforcement mechanisms
Sellers and Business Users
Gain stronger protection against unfair platform practices
May have clearer grounds to raise competition complaints
Investors and Digital Businesses
Increased regulatory scrutiny in Thailand’s digital economy
Greater emphasis on fair competition compliance in platform design
Regulatory Outlook
The guidelines signal a more proactive approach by the Trade Competition Commission in overseeing digital platform conduct, particularly in markets driven by data, algorithms, and network effects.
By focusing on both pricing and non-pricing behaviours, such as self-preferencing and data use, the TCC is aligning with global trends in digital competition enforcement. Notably, the emphasis on conduct-based assessment suggests that scrutiny may arise even without clear market dominance.
Businesses operating multi-sided platforms in Thailand should therefore expect closer regulatory attention on platform rules, pricing structures, and algorithmic systems going forward.
The full notification (in Thai) is available here at:https://www.tcct.or.th/assets/portals/1/files/Multi_sided_Platform.pdf
Written by
Manaswee Wongsuryrat
Partner
Intouch Songsermsakul
Associate
