Thailand's New Deportation Regulation: What Employers of Foreign Nationals Need to Know

Thailand has, for the first time, put in place a dedicated administrative regulation governing the deportation of foreign nationals. The Office of the Prime Minister Regulation on Deportation B.E. 2569 (2026) was published in the Royal Gazette on 27 August 2026, signed the previous day by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, and took effect from 28 August 2026.

Why the regulation exists

The regulation's preamble sets out the policy tension it is meant to resolve. Thailand has long maintained an open stance toward foreign nationals who visit, reside, work, or do business in the country in good faith and in compliance with the law. At the same time, the government notes that a number of foreign nationals — some lawfully in the country, some not — have engaged in conduct that either breaks the law for personal gain or otherwise runs contrary to public order and good morals. Because Thailand previously had no single, clearly defined administrative procedure for removing such individuals, government agencies lacked a consistent operational framework to act on. This regulation is intended to close that gap, giving relevant authorities a defined, swift process for enforcement.

Two distinct grounds for deportation

The regulation establishes two separate pathways by which a foreign national can be ordered to leave the Kingdom.

Conduct contrary to public order, without a criminal conviction. Under Clause 4, any foreign national whose behaviour is considered contrary to public order, good morals, or the public's wellbeing can be reported by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Interior (or a person the Permanent Secretary delegates) to the Minister of Interior, who then has the authority to order deportation. Notably, this ground does not depend on a court conviction — it is based on an administrative assessment of conduct. The same provision extends to anyone who acts as a user or supporter of such conduct, meaning the person facilitating or encouraging the behaviour can be caught by the regulation even if they are not the primary actor.

A defined list of offences following a completed sentence. Under Clause 5, once a foreign national has served a final court sentence in full and been released from prison, the Minister of Interior has authority to order their deportation where the underlying offence was one of the following:

• Entering or remaining in the Kingdom unlawfully under immigration law;

• Working in the Kingdom without lawful authorisation under the law governing foreign employment;

• Operating a business in the Kingdom in breach of the law governing foreign business operations;

• Forging government documents, or using forged government documents;

• Committing any offence carrying a penalty of five years' imprisonment or more; or

• Acting as the instigator, user, or supporter of any of the above offences

To make this workable in practice, the regulation builds in a coordination requirement: the Department of Corrections must notify the Ministry of Interior — providing the individual's name, nationality, case number, and related documentation — no fewer than 15 days before that person's release from prison. The Permanent Secretary (or delegate) must then report to the Minister for a deportation decision without delay. Separately, where a court has handed down a final judgment for imprisonment but suspended the sentence or substituted a fine, the Office of the Judiciary is required to pass the relevant case details to the Ministry of Interior so the same process can be triggered.

Re-entry bans

A deportation order issued under Clause 5 may — though is not required to — specify a period during which the deported individual is barred from re-entering Thailand. The duration is set within the order itself rather than fixed by the regulation, leaving this as a matter of ministerial discretion applied case by case.

How and where deportation is carried out

Any deportation order must have regard to Thai law, regulations, Cabinet resolutions, and Thailand's obligations under relevant international law (Clause 6). Absent a Prime Ministerial revocation of the order, the default position under Clause 7 is that the deportee is returned to their country of nationality, or — where nationality cannot be established — to the country they last declared as their place of residence before entering Thailand, via routes and procedures set by the Ministry of Interior.

Clause 8 introduces a protective mechanism aligned with the international law principle against sending someone to a place where they face torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, or enforced disappearance. Where the deportee's own country will not accept them, or where a foreign state or international organisation submits a diplomatic request — within seven days of the deportation order — asking that the individual be sent to a different country instead on protective grounds, and the deportee consents in writing, Thailand may direct the deportation accordingly. That process must be completed within 30 days of Thailand receiving the request, though the Minister may grant up to two extensions of up to 30 days each. If the deadline passes without a resolution, or if no alternative arrangement can be reached, the default removal process under Clause 7 applies.

Cost and residual authority

Deportation costs are to be set by regulations issued by the Ministry of Interior with the approval of the Ministry of Finance (Clause 9). Any implementation difficulty not otherwise addressed is to be resolved according to the Minister's determination (Clause 10).

What this means in practice for employers

The regulation's practical significance for businesses employing foreign nationals in Thailand lies less in the headline penalty and more in how directly it now links immigration and work permit non-compliance to a defined removal pathway — including cases where the permit itself is valid but the person's actual work has moved beyond what it authorises. Because the regulation also reaches instigators and supporters of covered conduct, employers should treat this as relevant not only to the employee directly affected but potentially to the business facilitating the arrangement.

Practically, this is a reasonable prompt to check whether promotions, reassignments, or informal changes to a foreign hire's day-to-day work have quietly taken them outside the boundaries their permit was issued for — a mismatch that is now more directly tied to removal risk than it was before.

This article is based on information procured from official sources and public portals. It is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal or immigration advice. Kindly consult the relevant public authority or an immigration advisor at the Legit Migrant for guidance specific to your circumstances.