NBTC’s Discretionary Rejections of Type III License Applications
Thailand’s telecom regulator, the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC), has shown that meeting formal criteria on paper does not guarantee license approval. The NBTC actively exercises discretion to deny Type III telecommunications license applications even if they closely resemble previously approved cases, especially if a deeper review reveals compliance issues. A key concern is ownership structure: Thai law (see https://fosrlaw.com/2021/thailands-telecommunications-business-act/) requires that a Type III licensee be genuinely Thai-owned and controlled. In one case, the NBTC was willing to grant a satellite operator a Type III license only after official documents from the Commerce Ministry verified the company’s Thai qualification, highlighting that approval depends on clear proof of majority Thai ownership. Without such proof or if the actual control structure contradicts it, the application is likely to be denied. Under the Telecommunications Business Act, the NBTC can consider public interest, competition, and national security, allowing it to diverge from previous decisions if new concerns emerge. Recently, internal policies have shifted toward stricter scrutiny, making the process more rigorous and extending the timeline to 2024–2025. Practically, this broad discretion allows the NBTC to reject applications that resemble earlier ones but do not meet its updated standards after detailed review.
No Copy-Cats
Regarding copycat applications and the scrutiny of foreign dominance, the complex review process discourages simply copying previous license submissions. Applicants who imitate earlier documents face thorough examinations in multiple phases, including questions, clarifications, and scrutiny of business plans, technical details, and ownership structures. For example, duplicating a network plan and financial forecasts may lead to verification against the applicant’s actual capacity. If figures lack credibility or operational plans don’t match experience, explanations will be required.
An industry example involved a foreign telecom partner using an earlier license template. Although the structure seemed identical, the NBTC’s detailed review revealed issues—the Thai “majority” shareholders had no real funding or involvement, indicating nominee arrangements, and some technical proposals were copied without actual capacity (see https://fosrlaw.com/2025/thailand-crackdown-illegal-nominee-structures-compliance/).
The NBTC rejected the license, citing violations of foreign dominance rules, which prohibit nominee shareholding, foreign control over management, and any behavior providing indirect control to foreigners, as per the 2011 Notification. This broad rule allows the NBTC to look beyond formalities. The example shows that substantive compliance is essential; superficial copying won’t work if real circumstances don’t meet legal and regulatory requirements.
Discretionary Approach
The NBTC’s broad discretionary authority and comprehensive review process are widely recognized (see https://fosrlaw.com/2025/thailand-telecom-license-applications-as-a-tool-for-investigations/).
It is layered and demanding. Applying for a license isn’t difficult, but obtaining one can be challenging. Multiple evaluation rounds are standard, and initial applications are rarely approved on the first try. Instead, applicants receive detailed questions and often need to submit revisions or additional documents.
Our observation is that NBTC’s efforts are deliberate and focused on ensuring that licensees managing critical infrastructure meet strict standards. A primary focus is enforcing rules on Thai ownership and preventing dominance. The NBTC denies licenses to applicants considered “foreign” under law (see https://fosrlaw.com/2025/thailand-nominee-shareholding-opinions-of-the-thai-supreme-court/), using a substance-over-form approach based on the 2011 Foreign Dominance Notification, which addresses various forms of foreign control.
Policy Changes
Policy changes have made the process more cautious and detailed. Today, approvals for specific sensitive or large-scale licenses require full board review, which can take months. Reports in 2024 confirm that the NBTC has become more deliberate, delaying or denying applications with compliance issues, even if they might have been approved with minimal review in the past. In summary, both official rules and real-world examples show that the NBTC actively uses its discretion—using multi-stage evaluations to verify genuine Thai control and compliance—and doesn’t hesitate to reject applications if they don’t meet standards, even if they outwardly resemble earlier approvals.
Naytiwut Jamallsawat is a respected partner at Formichella & Sritawat, where he leads the firm’s Corporate and Regulatory Practice. He advises some of the world’s top telecommunications and media companies operating in Thailand, with deep experience in NBTC licensing, satellite regulation, broadcasting, and OTT law. In addition to his regulatory expertise, Naytiwut has led teams on major deals involving Thai-foreign joint ventures in telecommunications that have successfully obtained Type III licenses from the NBTC. His work includes conducting due diligence, designing foreign-compliant structures, and preparing essential transaction documents, such as share purchase agreements, joint venture agreements, and related corporate and transactional documentation, all in line with relevant regulations. Naytiwut is recognized for combining legal precision with practical expertise to execute complex transactions in a regulated environment.
John Formichella is a founding partner of Formichella & Sritawat and leads the firm’s Technology, Media, and Telecommunications (TMT) practice. He has over twenty-seven years of experience in the telecommunications industry, including serving as General Counsel for a NASDAQ-listed telecom company. Earlier in his career, John advised business advocacy groups and U.S. government agencies on the telecommunications chapter of a proposed free trade agreement between the United States and Thailand. His work combines legal expertise with extensive regulatory insight across Southeast Asia. John regularly assists clients with telecom licensing, infrastructure projects, and strategic regulatory planning in Thailand.
Onnicha Khongthon is a Senior Associate at Formichella & Sritawat, working under the supervision of Naytiwut Jamallsawat. She concentrates on telecommunications, broadcasting, and satellite regulation. Onnicha has long-standing, hands-on experience navigating telecommunication license applications directly with officials at the NBTC. Her familiarity with the NBTC’s internal customs, review cycles, and decision-making practices allows her to anticipate and help clients avoid regulatory delays and pitfalls. She advises on foreign media structures, licensing compliance, and evolving digital platform rules. Her work combines legal precision with the practical knowledge required to operate effectively in Thailand’s regulatory environment.
The comments herein are for discussion and information purposes only and are not guaranteed to be up to date. Nothing herein should be or can be relied on as legal advice.
For any questions, you may contact Formichella & Sritawat at [email protected]
© 2025 Formichella & Sritawat Attorneys at Law